Hi, > Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> writes: > > I'm not sure what to make of all these options. I think providing a TAP > > output for pg_regress is a good idea. But then do we still need the old > > output? Is it worth maintaining two output formats that display exactly > > the same thing in slightly different ways? > > Probably is, because this is bad:
> > ... The proposed default format now hides the > > fact that some tests are started in parallel. I remember the last time > > I wanted to tweak the output of the parallel tests, people were very > > attached to the particular timing and spacing of the current output. So > > I'm not sure people will like this. > > and so is this: > > > The timing output is very popular. Where is that in the TAP output? > > Both of those things are fairly critical for test development. You > need to know what else might be running in parallel with a test case, > and you need to know whether you just bloated the runtime unreasonably. That should be doable with tap as well - afaics the output of that could nearly be the same as now, preceded by a #. The test timing output could (and I think should) also be output - but if I read the tap specification correctly, we'd either need to make it part of the test "description" or on a separate line. On 2022-07-04 10:39:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > More generally, I'm unhappy about the proposal that TAP should become > the default output. There is nothing particularly human-friendly > about it, whereas the existing format is something we have tuned to > our liking over literally decades. I don't mind if there's a way to > get TAP when you're actually intending to feed it into a TAP-parsing > tool, but I am not a TAP-parsing tool and I don't see why I should > have to put up with it. I'm mostly interested in the tap format because meson's testrunner can parse it - unsurprisingly it doesn't understand the current regress output. It's a lot nicer to immediately be pointed to the failed test(s) than having to scan through the output "manually". Greetings, Andres Freund
