Re: [HACKERS] make installcheck.

2014-11-21 Thread Teodor Sigaev
BTW, so far as that goes, make installcheck should honor PGOPTIONS, so you should be able to pass in "-c online_analyze.enable = off". Thank you a lot, this works. -- Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teo...@sigaev.ru WWW:

Re: [HACKERS] make installcheck.

2014-11-21 Thread Teodor Sigaev
If you're fooling with the optimizer's behavior I'd think a lot of the core regression tests would show bogus "failures" as well. Contrib module tests seem like the least of your worries. make check works well, of course, and I don't run core tests with installcheck. But when module updates I'

Re: [HACKERS] make installcheck.

2014-11-21 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev writes: > On production instance I have an installed preloaded library which affects > postgresql's optimizer (online_analyze if somebody is interesting). It works > well except executing make installcheck of other modules, for example > btree_gist: If you're fooling with the opt

Re: [HACKERS] make installcheck.

2014-11-21 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev writes: > Is there any way to unload that library for test or, at least, execute set > statement (set online_analyze.enable = off, actually) on test database > before > test run? BTW, so far as that goes, make installcheck should honor PGOPTIONS, so you should be able to pass in

[HACKERS] make installcheck.

2014-11-21 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Hi! On production instance I have an installed preloaded library which affects postgresql's optimizer (online_analyze if somebody is interesting). It works well except executing make installcheck of other modules, for example btree_gist: test numeric ... ok test not_equal

Re: [HACKERS] make installcheck is broken in HEAD on mingw

2009-09-02 Thread Tom Lane
Itagaki Takahiro writes: > WARNING: getopt(p) = ostgres > FATAL: attempted change of parameter "port" ignored > The first argument 'postgres' was interpreted as "-p ostgres" by getopt(). Ugh. > We might need to re-initilaize variables for getopt() because we call > process_postgres_sw

Re: [HACKERS] make installcheck is broken in HEAD on mingw

2009-09-01 Thread Itagaki Takahiro
Tom Lane wrote: > Itagaki Takahiro writes: > > "make installcheck" seems to be broken in HEAD on mingw for a few days, > > though it ran sucessfully on Linux. > > The mingw buildfarm machines seem to be happy. Are you sure you > have a clean build? Yes, but distclean and deleting auto-genera

Re: [HACKERS] make installcheck is broken in HEAD on mingw

2009-09-01 Thread Tom Lane
Itagaki Takahiro writes: > "make installcheck" seems to be broken in HEAD on mingw for a few days, > though it ran sucessfully on Linux. The mingw buildfarm machines seem to be happy. Are you sure you have a clean build? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mail

[HACKERS] make installcheck is broken in HEAD on mingw

2009-09-01 Thread Itagaki Takahiro
"make installcheck" seems to be broken in HEAD on mingw for a few days, though it ran sucessfully on Linux. $ cd contrib/citext/ $ make installcheck make -C ../../src/test/regress pg_regress.exe make[1]: Entering directory `/d/projects/head/src/test/regress' make[1]: `pg_regress.exe' is up to date

[HACKERS] make installcheck

2004-11-02 Thread Magnus Hagander
I may have asked this before, but I don't think I got a response. Is there any reason for "make installcheck" to run the serial schedule when "make check" runs the parallel one? If there is, could we perhaps invent "make installcheck-par" to run the parallel tests on an installed database? //Magn