Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Unit test fail on GreenPlum (#3190)
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Unit test fail on GreenPlum (#3190) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+OCxowdoxCvcV6ag4Q85rD5HuG29jS08BH0M3V5Uac4EfN7pg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [pgadmin4][patch] Unit test fail on GreenPlum (#3190) (Joao De Almeida Pereira <jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io>) |
Ответы |
Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Unit test fail on GreenPlum (#3190)
|
Список | pgadmin-hackers |
Hi
On Friday, March 9, 2018, Joao De Almeida Pereira <jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote:
--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Friday, March 9, 2018, Joao De Almeida Pereira <jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote:
Hello Hackers,Attached you can find the patch that skip some tests and correct issues on SQL that are failing when trying to connect to a GreenPlum database.We did this by adding a attribute to to test_json called "db_type" that will carry the type of database we are running tests against.
Any reason we can't do that dynamically as we do with the EPAS-specific tests?
When we run tests against a GreenPlum instance the configuration would look like this:{
"name": "GreenPlum",
"comment": "GreenPlum DB",
"db_username": "gp",
"host": "localhost",
"db_password": "",
"db_port": 5433,
"maintenance_db": "postgres",
"sslmode": "prefer",
"tablespace_path": "",
"enabled": true,
"db_type": "gpdb"
}ThanksJoao
--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgadmin-hackers по дате отправления: