Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Fabien COELHO wrote: Thus the only performance improvement I can see is to change the install script, for instance by considering the multi-argument apache version as a candidate replacement. You can always override the default to use your own install program if you are really pressed for

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-20 Thread Fabien COELHO
Dear Peter, Thus the only performance improvement I can see is to change the install script, for instance by considering the multi-argument apache version as a candidate replacement. You can always override the default to use your own install program if you are really pressed for performance.

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-19 Thread Fabien COELHO
Dear Tom, Improving the performance would require to fix the install script so that it can handle more than one argument at once, and/or use a more or less standard install program when available. We used to try to use the standard install program when available. After sufficient bitter

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-19 Thread Reini Urban
Fabien COELHO schrieb: Improving the performance would require to fix the install script so that it can handle more than one argument at once, and/or use a more or less standard install program when available. We used to try to use the standard install program when available. After sufficient

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-18 Thread Fabien COELHO
Dear Tom, What I'd rather see is some effort spent on speeding up our install script, maybe by allowing it to install multiple files per invocation. The recent changes to force install-all-headers have caused a serious degradation of make install performance, Yes, I agree. and I think that's where

[PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-15 Thread Reini Urban
add boolean option --temp-keep to pg_regress to keep the existing tmp_check installation, instead of overwriting it with a fresh make install. Useful to test minor modifications in the current tmp_check installation. -- Reini Urban http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/ ***

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Uh, why would someone use this option? --- Reini Urban wrote: add boolean option --temp-keep to pg_regress to keep the existing tmp_check installation, instead of overwriting it with a fresh make install. Useful to

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Reini Urban [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: add boolean option --temp-keep to pg_regress to keep the existing tmp_check installation, instead of overwriting it with a fresh make install. Useful to test minor modifications in the current tmp_check installation. This doesn't seem like a

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-15 Thread Reini Urban
Bruce Momjian schrieb: Uh, why would someone use this option? after fixing a minor issue, not to wait for a full de-install / install and test database loss. minor issues can be regression tests updates, or updated single binaries.

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Reini Urban wrote: Bruce Momjian schrieb: Uh, why would someone use this option? after fixing a minor issue, not to wait for a full de-install / install and test database loss. minor issues can be regression tests updates, or updated single binaries. Seems to be of too limited a usage.

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress --temp-keep

2004-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Reini Urban [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bruce Momjian schrieb: Uh, why would someone use this option? after fixing a minor issue, not to wait for a full de-install / install and test database loss. minor issues can be regression tests updates, or updated single binaries. Personally I find