Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c4c618c2-8ab4-df89-0f08-4f56cb4ac27c@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/21/18 21:49, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 09:42:35AM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: >> I'm super excited by the idea of multi-version support in TAP, if that's >> what you mean. >> >> Why? Because I use TAP heavily in extensions. Especially replication >> extensions. Which like to talk across multiple versions. I currently need >> external test frameworks and some hideous hacks to do this. > > Okay, in front of such enthusiasm we could keep at least the refactoring > part of PostgresNode.pm :) I took a quick look at that part. It appears to be quite invasive, more than I would have hoped. Basically, it imposes that from now on all program invocations must observe the bindir setting, which someone is surely going to forget. The pg_upgrade tests aren't going to exercise all possible paths where programs are called, so this is going to lead to omissions and inconsistencies -- which will then possibly only be found much later by the extensions that Craig was talking about. I'd like to see this more isolated, maybe via a path change, or something inside system_or_bail or something less invasive and more maintainable. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: