Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> The other routine mistake, which I see Robert just made again,
>> is to break the at-most-twenty-parallel-tests-at-once convention.
>> I wonder if we can get in some sort of automated check for that.
> There's no reason why pg_regress couldn't have a
> --bail-if-group-size-exceeds=N argument, or why we couldn't have a
> separate Perl script to validate the schedule file as part of the
> build process.
I'd go for the former approach; seems like less new code and fewer cycles
used to enforce the rule.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
