Re: Adding "large" to PG_TEST_EXTRA

Hi,

On 2023-02-13 14:15:24 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:

* Andres Freund (andres@anarazel.de) wrote:

On 2023-02-13 13:45:41 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:

Are there existing tests that we should add into that set that you're
thinking of..?  I've been working with the Kerberos tests and that's
definitely one that seems to fit this description...

I think the kerberos tests are already opt-in, so I don't think we need to
gate it further.

I'd like to lump them in with a bunch of other tests though, to give it
more chance to run..  My issue currently is that they're *too* gated.

Isn't the reason that we gate them that much that the test poses a security
hazard on a multi-user system?

That's my understanding.

I don't think we should combine opting into security hazards with opting into
using disk space.

I agree

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com