On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 03:20:09PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > If we're going to keep them in vacuum.sql, we should use the > client_min_messages fix there, as that's a full solution not just > reducing the window. But I don't agree that these tests are worth > the cycles, given the coverage elsewhere. The probability of breaking > this option is just not high enough to justify core-regression-test > coverage.
I would rather keep the solution with client_min_messages, and the tests in vacuum.sql to keep those checks for the grammar parsing. So this basically brings us back to use the patch I proposed here: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20191107013942.ga1...@paquier.xyz Any objections? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
