Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: >> I happened to notice that the regression tests contain both >> largeobject.sql and large_object.sql. This seems at best confusing and at >> worst a source of mistakes. The second file was added in March by commit >> ff992c074, has never been touched by any other commit, and is only 8 lines >> long. Was there a really good reason not to incorporate that test into >> largeobject.sql?
> Just to be clear that we're talking about the same thing- there is no > 'largeobject.sql' in a clean source tree. There is a 'largeobject.source' > in src/test/regress/input which is converted to largeobject.sql. Right, sorry for the imprecision. > As for the general question of if the two could be merged, I can't think > of any reason off-hand why that wouldn't work, nor do I have any > particular recollection as to why I created a new file instead of using > the existing. My shell history tells me that I found largeobject.source > while crafting the test case but not why I didn't use it. You've got shell history back to March? Wow. > The main thing is that the large_object.sql was specifically added to > test pg_upgrade/pg_dump, so the created object needs to be kept around > in the regression database with the comment after the tests run for that > to happen. Right. I was thinking of just appending large_object.sql to the end of the other file. It's possible that there's some issue involving race conditions against some concurrent test, but I'll look around. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers