Re: Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > - It would be nice to have command_ok and command_fails in PostgresNode
>>> >   too; that would remove the need for setting $ENV{PGPORT} but it's
>>> >   possible to run commands outside a node too, so we'd need duplicates,
>>> >   which would be worse.
>>>
>>> I am fine to let it the way your patch does it. There are already many changes.
>>
>> Idea: we can have a bare command_ok exported by TestLib just as
>> currently, and instance method PostgresNode->command_ok that first sets
>> local $ENV{PGPORT} and then calls the other one.
>
> Hm. That would be cleaner and make the code more consistent. Now as
> TestLib exports command_ok, command_like and command_fails, we would
> get redefinition errors when compiling the code if those routines are
> not named differently in PostgresNode. If you want to have the names
> consistent, then I guess that the only way would be to remove those
> routines from the export list of TestLib and call them directly as for
> example TestLib::command_ok(). See for example the patch attached that
> applies on top on your patch 2 that adds a set of routines in
> PostgresNode with a slightly different name.

Well, Alvaro has whispered me a more elegant method by using TestLib()
to only import a portion of the routines and avoid the redefinition
errors. Hence, patch 0001 attached creates equivalents of command_*
for PostgresNode and tests use it without setting PGPORT. Patch 0002
is a run of perltidy on the whole.
--
Michael