On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 11:05 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think we are often too quick to throw out perfectly good tests. > Citing that some similar GUCs don't do testing as a reason to skip > them just seems to me like an example of "two wrongs don't make a > right". > > There is a third option. > > Keep the tests. Because they take excessive time to run, that simply > means you should run them *conditionally* based on the PG_TEST_EXTRA > environment variable so they don't impact the normal BF execution. The > documentation [1] says this env var is for "resource intensive" tests > -- AFAIK this is exactly the scenario we find ourselves in, so is > exactly what this env var was meant for. > > Search other *.pl tests for PG_TEST_EXTRA to see some examples. >
I don't see the long-running tests to be added under PG_TEST_EXTRA as that will make it unusable after some point. Now, if multiple senior members feel it is okay to add long-running tests under PG_TEST_EXTRA then I am open to considering it. We can keep this test as a separate patch so that the patch is being tested in CI or in manual tests before commit. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
