At Sat, 30 Jul 2022 10:24:39 -0400, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote in > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > > On 2022-Jul-30, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> PG_VERSION would be simpler. Looking at postmaster.pid would require > >> a lookup at external_pid_file, and as it is not set by default you > >> would need to add some extra logic in the tests where > >> external_pid_file = NULL <=> PGDATA/postmaster.pid. > > > Hmm, no? as I recall external_pid_file is an *additional* PID file; it > > doesn't supplant postmaster.pid. > > Right. postmaster.pid absolutely should be there if the postmaster > is up (and if it ain't, you're going to have lots of other difficulty > in running the regression tests...). It doesn't feel quite as static > as PG_VERSION, though.
Thanks for committing it. Also the revised test (being suggested by Michael) looks good. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
