Peter Eisentraut escribió: > On 11/11/12 6:59 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > I haven't followed this too closely, but I did wonder several days ago > > why this wasn't being made an initdb-time decision. > > One problem I see with this is that it would make regression testing > much more cumbersome. Basically, to do a proper job, you'd have to run > all the tests twice, once against each initdb setting. Either we > automate this, which would mean everyone's tests are now running almost > twice as long, or we don't, which would mean that some critical piece of > low-level code would likely not get wide testing.
We already have that problem with the isolation tests regarding transaction isolation levels: the tests are only run with whatever is the default_transaction_isolation setting, which is read committed in all buildfarm installs; so repeatable read and serializable are only tested when someone gets around to tweaking an installation manually. A proposal has been floated to fix that, but it needs someone to actually implement it. I wonder if something similar could be used to handle this case as well. I also wonder, though, if the existing test frameworks are really the best mechanisms to verify block layer functionality. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
