On 01/26/2017 03:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Andrew Dunstan <andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >>> On 01/24/2017 05:17 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>>> Maybe we can drop that line and put it back once we get COMMENT ON >>>> CURRENT_DATABASE. >>> Works for me. >> If that's enough to get the "make check" cases passing in the buildfarm, >> then +1. > Okay, done. > > It is really quite annoying that the buildfarm doesn't do what stock > tests do. What about pushing a bit stronger for having these > optimizations as part of the standard build run, instead of being only > in the buildfarm client script? >
There is nothing that the buildfarm does that's not a stock test. What it does is run the stock tests with USE_MODULE_DB=1 (which you can do too). That is something provided for in our Make files. The reason is that otherwise we constantly overwrite the regression database. That can make it a lot harder to go back after a buildfarm run and find errors. That's why you should not assume the name of the database when you're writing a test. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, 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
