Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Allow TAP tests to be run individually

[Michael Paquier]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Peter Eisentraut
 wrote:
> On 11/14/16 3:52 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I don't mind. This patch uses the following pattern:
>> $(or $(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
>> While something more spread in Postgres source would be something like that:
>> $(if $(PROVE_TESTS),$(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
>> It seems to me that we'd prefer that for consistency, but I see no
>> reason to not keep your patch as well. I am marking that as ready for
>> committer.
>
> ($or ...) is a newer feature of GNU make, so we have avoided that so
> far.  I have committed your v2 with $(if ...).

Thanks, I am just going to use it...
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Allow TAP tests to be run individually

[Peter Eisentraut]

On 11/14/16 3:52 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I don't mind. This patch uses the following pattern:
> $(or $(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
> While something more spread in Postgres source would be something like that:
> $(if $(PROVE_TESTS),$(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
> It seems to me that we'd prefer that for consistency, but I see no
> reason to not keep your patch as well. I am marking that as ready for
> committer.

($or ...) is a newer feature of GNU make, so we have avoided that so
far.  I have committed your v2 with $(if ...).

-- 
Peter Eisentraut  http://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

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Allow TAP tests to be run individually

[Craig Ringer]

On 14 November 2016 at 16:52, Michael Paquier  wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Craig Ringer  wrote:
>> On 11 November 2016 at 18:13, Michael Paquier  
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Craig Ringer  wrote:
 Please backpatch to at least 9.6 since it's trivial and we seem to be
 doing that for TAP. 9.5 and 9.4 would be nice too :)
>>>
>>> Yes please!
>>
>> No immediate takers, so adding to CF.
>>
>> I've taken the liberty of adding you as a reviewer based on your
>> response and the simplicity of the patch. if you get the chance to
>> test and verify please set ready for committer.
>
> I don't mind. This patch uses the following pattern:
> $(or $(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
> While something more spread in Postgres source would be something like that:
> $(if $(PROVE_TESTS),$(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
> It seems to me that we'd prefer that for consistency, but I see no
> reason to not keep your patch as well. I am marking that as ready for
> committer.

Thanks.

-- 
 Craig Ringer   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

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Allow TAP tests to be run individually

[Michael Paquier]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Craig Ringer  wrote:
> On 11 November 2016 at 18:13, Michael Paquier  
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Craig Ringer  wrote:
>>> Please backpatch to at least 9.6 since it's trivial and we seem to be
>>> doing that for TAP. 9.5 and 9.4 would be nice too :)
>>
>> Yes please!
>
> No immediate takers, so adding to CF.
>
> I've taken the liberty of adding you as a reviewer based on your
> response and the simplicity of the patch. if you get the chance to
> test and verify please set ready for committer.

I don't mind. This patch uses the following pattern:
$(or $(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
While something more spread in Postgres source would be something like that:
$(if $(PROVE_TESTS),$(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
It seems to me that we'd prefer that for consistency, but I see no
reason to not keep your patch as well. I am marking that as ready for
committer.
-- 
Michael
diff --git a/src/Makefile.global.in b/src/Makefile.global.in
index ea61eb5..aa1fa65 100644
--- a/src/Makefile.global.in
+++ b/src/Makefile.global.in
@@ -354,12 +354,12 @@ ifeq ($(enable_tap_tests),yes)
 
 define prove_installcheck
 rm -rf $(CURDIR)/tmp_check/log
-cd $(srcdir) && TESTDIR='$(CURDIR)' PATH="$(bindir):$$PATH" PGPORT='6$(DEF_PGPORT)' top_builddir='$(CURDIR)/$(top_builddir)' PG_REGRESS='$(CURDIR)/$(top_builddir)/src/test/regress/pg_regress' $(PROVE) $(PG_PROVE_FLAGS) $(PROVE_FLAGS) t/*.pl
+cd $(srcdir) && TESTDIR='$(CURDIR)' PATH="$(bindir):$$PATH" PGPORT='6$(DEF_PGPORT)' top_builddir='$(CURDIR)/$(top_builddir)' PG_REGRESS='$(CURDIR)/$(top_builddir)/src/test/regress/pg_regress' $(PROVE) $(PG_PROVE_FLAGS) $(PROVE_FLAGS) $(if $(PROVE_TESTS),$(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
 endef
 
 define prove_check
 rm -rf $(CURDIR)/tmp_check/log
-cd $(srcdir) && TESTDIR='$(CURDIR)' $(with_temp_install) PGPORT='6$(DEF_PGPORT)' PG_REGRESS='$(CURDIR)/$(top_builddir)/src/test/regress/pg_regress' $(PROVE) $(PG_PROVE_FLAGS) $(PROVE_FLAGS) t/*.pl
+cd $(srcdir) && TESTDIR='$(CURDIR)' $(with_temp_install) PGPORT='6$(DEF_PGPORT)' PG_REGRESS='$(CURDIR)/$(top_builddir)/src/test/regress/pg_regress' $(PROVE) $(PG_PROVE_FLAGS) $(PROVE_FLAGS) $(if $(PROVE_TESTS),$(PROVE_TESTS),t/*.pl)
 endef
 
 else
diff --git a/src/test/perl/README b/src/test/perl/README
index 710a0d8..cfb45a1 100644
--- a/src/test/perl/README
+++ b/src/test/perl/README
@@ -6,6 +6,12 @@ across the source tree, particularly tests in src/bin and src/test. It's used
 to drive tests for backup and restore, replication, etc - anything that can't
 really be expressed using pg_regress or the isolation test framework.
 
+The tests are invoked via perl's 'prove' command, wrapped in PostgreSQL
+makefiles to handle instance setup etc. See the $(prove_check) and
+$(prove_installcheck) targets in Makefile.global. By default every test in the
+t/ subdirectory is run. Individual test(s) can be run instead by passing
+something like PROVE_TESTS="t/001_testname.pl t/002_othertestname.pl" to make.
+
 You should prefer to write tests using pg_regress in src/test/regress, or
 isolation tester specs in src/test/isolation, if possible. If not, check to
 see if your new tests make sense under an existing tree in src/test, like

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Allow TAP tests to be run individually

[Craig Ringer]

On 11 November 2016 at 18:13, Michael Paquier  wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Craig Ringer  wrote:
>> Please backpatch to at least 9.6 since it's trivial and we seem to be
>> doing that for TAP. 9.5 and 9.4 would be nice too :)
>
> Yes please!

No immediate takers, so adding to CF.

I've taken the liberty of adding you as a reviewer based on your
response and the simplicity of the patch. if you get the chance to
test and verify please set ready for committer.


-- 
 Craig Ringer   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

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Allow TAP tests to be run individually

[Michael Paquier]

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Craig Ringer  wrote:
> Please backpatch to at least 9.6 since it's trivial and we seem to be
> doing that for TAP. 9.5 and 9.4 would be nice too :)

Yes please!
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers