> On 30 Mar 2023, at 20:44, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Maybe it'd be close enough to expect there to be no roles named > "regress_xxx". In combination with > -DENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS, that would prevent us > from accidentally leaving stuff behind, and we could hope that it doesn't > cause false failures in real installations.
Would that check be always on or only when pg_regress is compiled with -DENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS? > Another idea could be for pg_regress to enforce that "select count(*) > from pg_roles" gives the same answer before and after the test run. That wouldn't prevent the contents of pg_roles to have changed though, so there is a (slim) false positive risk with that no? -- Daniel Gustafsson
