On 25 November 2016 at 02:47, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Craig Ringer wrote: >> On 27 October 2016 at 00:42, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 7:17 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> >> On 2016-09-23 16:04:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> Looking back over the thread, I see that you also proposed installing >> >>> isolationtester and pg_isolation_regress for the benefit of extensions. >> >>> I'm very much less excited about that idea. It'd be substantially more >> >>> dead weight in typical installations, and I'm not sure that it'd be >> >>> useful >> >>> to common extensions, and I'm not eager to treat isolationtester's API >> >>> and behavior as something we need to hold stable for extension use. >> >> >> >> FWIW, I'd be quite happy if it were installed. Running isolationtester >> >> when compiling extensions against distribution postgres packages would >> >> be quite useful. >> > >> > +1. >> >> Patch attached. > > Hmm but this only installs isolationtester itself ... don't you need > pg_isolation_regress too?
Yeah, as Andres pointed out offlist after I posted this. Meant to follow up but got side-tracked. It needs PGXS support to be properly useful. -- 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