On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 03:41:15PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 12/01/2012 02:34 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 02:31:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >>Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > >>>On 2012-12-01 12:14:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >>>>It could do with some comments ;-) > >>>Hehe, yes. Hopefully this version has enough of that. > >>Hm, maybe too many --- I don't really think it's necessary for utility.c > >>to provide a redundant explanation of what's happening. > >> > >>Committed with adjustments --- mainly, the > >>TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId test was flat out wrong, because it > >>would accept a parent transaction ID as well as a subcommitted > >>subtransaction ID. We could safely allow the latter, but I don't think > >>it's worth the trouble to add another xact.c test function. > >Thanks everyone. I can confirm that pg_upgrades make "check now" > >passes, so this should green the buildfarm. Again, I aplogize for the > >fire drill. > > > > > I've added better logging of pg_upgrade testing to the buildfarm > module: > <https://github.com/PGBuildFarm/client-code/commit/83834cceaea95ba42c03a1079a8c768782e32a6b> > example is at > <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=crake&dt=2012-12-01%2017%3A44%3A03> > This will be in the next buildfarm client release.
Wow, that looks great. You even show the last few lines from the log files! -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
