On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 02:12:42AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > FWIW I successfully used the preliminary PqFFI stuff Andrew posted to > write a test program for bug #18377, which I think ended up being better > than with BackgroundPsql, so I think it's a good way forward. As for > back-patching it, I suspect we're going to end up backpatching the > framework anyway just because we'll want to have it available for > backpatching future tests, even if we keep a backpatch minimal by doing > only the framework and not existing tests. > > I also backpatched the PqFFI and PostgreSQL::Session modules to older PG > branches, to run my test program there. This required only removing > some lines from PqFFI.pm that were about importing libpq functions that > older libpq didn't have.
Nice! I definitely +1 the backpatching of the testing bits. This stuff can make validating bugs so much easier, particularly when there are conflicting parts in the backend after a cherry-pick. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
