On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 at 16:56, Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 03:04:14PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > That's excessive. The policy Alvaro mentions applies to globally-visible > > object names (i.e., database, role, and tablespace names), and it's there > > to try to ensure that doing "make installcheck" against a live > > installation won't clobber any non-test-created objects. There's no > point > > in having such a policy within a test database --- its most likely effect > > there would be to increase the risk that different test scripts step on > > each others' toes. If you feel a need for a name prefix for non-global > > objects, use something based on the name of your test script. > > But we *are* talking about the role to be created to allow stable output > of \df+ , so it's necessary to name it "regress_*". To appease > ENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS, and to avoid clobbering > global objects during "installcheck". > Tom is talking about my informal policy of prefixing all objects. Only global objects need to be prefixed with regress_, but I prefixed everything I created (functions as well as the role). I actually called the role regress_psql_df and used that entire role name as the prefix of my function names, so I think it unlikely that I’ll collide with anything else.
