Craig Ringer <ring...@ringerc.id.au> writes: > On 07/18/2012 08:31 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Not sure if we need a whole "farm", but certainly having at least one >> machine testing this sort of stuff on a regular basis would make me feel >> a lot better.
> OK. That's something I can actually be useful for. > My current qemu/kvm test harness control code is in Python since that's > what all the other tooling for the project I was using it for is in. Is > it likely to be useful for me to adapt that code for use for a Pg > crash-test harness, or will you need a particular tool/language to be > used? If so, which/what? I'll do pretty much anything except Perl. I'll > have a result for you more quickly working in Python, though I'm happy > enough to write it in C (or Java, but I'm guessing that won't get any > enthusiasm around here). If we were talking about code that was going to end up in the PG distribution, I'd kind of want it to be in C or Perl, just to keep down the number of languages we're depending on. However, it's not obvious that a tool like this would ever go into our distribution. I'd suggest working with what you're comfortable with, and we can worry about translation when and if there's a reason to. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers