On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 19 March 2012 01:50, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I am *not* a fan of regression tests that try to microscopically test >> every feature in the system. > > I see your point of view. I suppose I can privately hold onto the test > suite, since it might prove useful again. > > I will work on a pg_regress based approach with a reasonably-sized > random subset of about 20 of my existing tests, to provide some basic > smoke testing.
This may sound rather tortured, but in the main regression suite there is a .c file that links some stuff into the backend that is then accessed via CREATE FUNCTION to do some special fiddly bits. Could a creative hook be used here to avoid the repetition you are avoiding via Python? (e.g. constant resetting of pg_stat_statements or whatnot). It might sound too much like changing the system under test, but I think it would still retain most of the value. I also do like the pg_regress workflow in general, although clearly it cannot do absolutely everything. Running and interpreting the results of your tests was not hard, but it was definitely *different* which could be a headache if one-off testing frameworks proliferate. -- fdr -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
