On tis, 2011-07-12 at 08:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: > > It has occurred to me a few times that it could be useful to clarify the > > approach here. If we could somehow have a separable cleanup step for > > every test, and eliminate interdependencies between tests, we could more > > easily support a number of uses cases such as creating a completely > > populated regression test database for playing, or running tests in > > random order or in differently parallelized scenarios. > > The limiting case of this is that each regression test script would be > expected to start in an empty database and leave the DB empty on exit. > I think that would make the tests less useful, not more, for several > reasons: > > 1. They'd be slower, since every test would have to start by creating > and populating some tables. > > 2. The final state of the regression database would no longer be useful > as an environment for running ad-hoc manual tests. > > 3. The final state of the regression database would no longer be useful > as a test case for pg_dump and pg_upgrade.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I wanted take out the cleanup parts out of all test cases and make it a choice whether to run them. Right now we have a lot of test cases that clean up after themselves, which is useful in some cases (testing the cleaning, for one thing), but not useful for 2. and 3. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
