Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 11/27/14 3:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> > I'm not too happy with that approach, because packagers are going to >> > tend to think they should package any files installed by install-world. >> > The entire point of t

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Michael Paquier wrote: > It would be good to be consistent on Windows with what is now done on other > platforms: those modules should not be installed by default, but it would > be good to make install.pm a bit smarter with for example an option "full", > aka install server + client + test module

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > I also attach some changes for the MSVC build stuff. I tested it and it > builds fine AFAICT, but it doesn't install because Install.pm wants to > install contrib modules from contrib/ (which seems reasonable) but my > hack adds the src/t

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

On 12/17/2014 01:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: On 12/17/2014 11:34 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Oh, darn, I thought we had a version check. Will fix. OK, I have committed a fix. Revised script is at

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 12/17/2014 11:34 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Oh, darn, I thought we had a version check. Will fix. > OK, I have committed a fix. Revised script is at >

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

On 12/17/2014 11:34 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 12/17/2014 10:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: On 12/16/2014 04:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I've put this in dromedary as well (though the HEAD build that's running right this moment is still using the 4.13 script). I take it I don'

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

On 12/17/2014 10:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: On 12/16/2014 04:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I've put this in dromedary as well (though the HEAD build that's running right this moment is still using the 4.13 script). I take it I don't need to adjust the configuration file? Nope, n

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 12/16/2014 04:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I've put this in dromedary as well (though the HEAD build that's running >> right this moment is still using the 4.13 script). I take it I don't need >> to adjust the configuration file? > Nope, no config changes required. As s

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > > > Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > Any brave buildfarm owners on *nix can try it by replacing their copy of > > > run_build.pl with the bleeding edge version. We can't put it in a client > > > release until we fix

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > I have pushed this change, and crake will be running the code. See < > https://github.com/PGBuildFarm/client-code/commit/d656c1c3ce46f290791c5ba5ede2f8ac8dfa342e > > > > Crake just uploaded its first test result

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

On 12/16/2014 04:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: I have pushed this change, and crake will be running the code. See Any brave buildfarm owners on *nix can try it by replacing their copy o

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

Andrew Dunstan writes: > I have pushed this change, and crake will be running the code. See > > > Any brave buildfarm owners on *nix can try it by replacing their copy of > run_build.pl with the bleedi

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

On 12/16/2014 04:02 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: I have pushed this change, and crake will be running the code. See Crake just uploaded its first test results with the testmodules

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I have pushed this change, and crake will be running the code. See > Crake just uploaded its first test results with the testmodules stuff working: http://buildfarm.postgresql.org

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

On 12/16/2014 11:22 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 12/16/2014 09:31 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Hi Andrew, Did you have a chance to review this? Oh, darn, not yet. I will try to take a look today. I have pushed this change, and crake will be running the code. See

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

On 12/16/2014 09:31 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Hi Andrew, Did you have a chance to review this? Oh, darn, not yet. I will try to take a look today. cheers andrew -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.post

Re: [alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib]

Hi Andrew, Did you have a chance to review this? Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > > On 11/29/2014 10:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > >Anyway I just pushed this src/test/modules/ patch, which has > > >implications for buildfarm: these new test modules are not invoked > > >exc

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 11/27/14 3:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > I'm not too happy with that approach, because packagers are going to > > tend to think they should package any files installed by install-world. > > The entire point of this change, IMO, is that the test modules should > > *not* get

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 11/27/2014 12:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> So test_decoding is fairly useful for users demonstrating that decoding >> > works, especially if they're also testing an external decoding module >> > and are unsure of where their replication problem is located, or what's >> > wrong with their HBA settin

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 2014-11-27 15:51:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Josh Berkus writes: > > So test_decoding is fairly useful for users demonstrating that decoding > > works, especially if they're also testing an external decoding module > > and are unsure of where their replication problem is located, or what's > >

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 11/27/14 3:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I'm not too happy with that approach, because packagers are going to > tend to think they should package any files installed by install-world. > The entire point of this change, IMO, is that the test modules should > *not* get installed, certainly not by norma

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

> -Original Message- > From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Josh Berkus > Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 5:48 AM > To: Alvaro Herrera; Pg Hackers > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib > >

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Tom Lane wrote: > I'm not too happy with that approach, because packagers are going to > tend to think they should package any files installed by install-world. > The entire point of this change, IMO, is that the test modules should > *not* get installed, certainly not by normal install targets.

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Josh Berkus writes: > So test_decoding is fairly useful for users demonstrating that decoding > works, especially if they're also testing an external decoding module > and are unsure of where their replication problem is located, or what's > wrong with their HBA settings. For that reason it's imp

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 11/24/2014 05:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > test_parser (a toy text search parser, added in 2007) > dummy_seclabel (for SECURITY LABEL regression testing, added Sept 2010) > worker_spi (for bgworkers, added Dec 2012) > test_shm_mq (test program for shared memory queues, added Jan 2014) > test_d

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Alvaro Herrera writes: > I have also changed things so that: > 1. test modules are not installed by "make install", not checked by > "make installcheck", not checked by "make check". > 2. test modules are checked by "make check-world" (this is consistent > with handling of contrib). > 3. test m

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 11/26/14 9:27 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > I haven't done anything about documentation. I thought a new chapter > > after "Additional Supplied Modules", perhaps entitled "Additional Sample > > Modules" would be appropriate. > > I would remove the SGML files and put s

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 11/26/14 9:27 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I haven't done anything about documentation. I thought a new chapter > after "Additional Supplied Modules", perhaps entitled "Additional Sample > Modules" would be appropriate. I would remove the SGML files and put simple README files into each directo

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > Because many of them had either "test" in their names or some other > > now-useless particle, I renamed them: > > > > worker_spi -> bgworker > > test_decoding -> logical_decoding > > dummy_seclabel

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > This is pretty bulky, but really the vast majority of the changes here > > are just "git mv". > > For ease of review, is there a way to get git to show just the diffs that > *aren't* git mv? (That is, show changes in a file's content without > respect

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 2014-11-26 10:08:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > This is pretty bulky, but really the vast majority of the changes here > > are just "git mv". > > For ease of review, is there a way to get git to show just the diffs that > *aren't* git mv? (That is, show changes in a fi

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Alvaro Herrera writes: > This is pretty bulky, but really the vast majority of the changes here > are just "git mv". For ease of review, is there a way to get git to show just the diffs that *aren't* git mv? (That is, show changes in a file's content without respect to its having moved?)

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

This is pretty bulky, but really the vast majority of the changes here are just "git mv". -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services test_modules.patch.gz Description: application/gzip -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailin

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Here's a patch. This creates a new subdir src/test/modules and places > the five initially proposed modules in there. They continue to have > their makefile with the same ifdef USE_PGXS pattern; they are no longer > installed by default

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Here's a patch. This creates a new subdir src/test/modules and places > the five initially proposed modules in there. They continue to have > their makefile with the same ifdef USE_PGXS pattern; they are no longer > installed by default. >

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Here's a patch. This creates a new subdir src/test/modules and places the five initially proposed modules in there. They continue to have their makefile with the same ifdef USE_PGXS pattern; they are no longer installed by default. Because many of them had either "test" in their names or some ot

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Peter Eisentraut writes: > On 11/24/14 10:46 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I think that test_parser is arguably useful as a skeleton/example for >> user-written TS parsers, so I'd lean towards leaving it where it is, >> but the others could move to src/test/ IMO. > I think a useful dividing line would b

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 2014-11-25 16:07:52 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 11/24/14 9:35 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > I actually think that test_decoding is somewhat useful in other cases as > > well, so it might be prudent to leave it there. > > For what? > > > src/test/ is good, but I think there should be ano

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 11/24/14 10:46 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > I think that test_parser is arguably useful as a skeleton/example for > user-written TS parsers, so I'd lean towards leaving it where it is, > but the others could move to src/test/ IMO. I think a useful dividing line would be, is it normally useful to insta

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 11/24/14 9:35 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > I actually think that test_decoding is somewhat useful in other cases as > well, so it might be prudent to leave it there. For what? > src/test/ is good, but I think there should be another subdirectory > inside. testcases/? What tests are not test cas

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 11/24/14 8:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > What would you say if we were to move them to src/test/? Yes please. > Now, I know there is some resistance to the idea of moving source code > around. I think clarifying "contrib" is more important than that. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing lis

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:49:45AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > What's the general opinion on having test programs somewhere other than > contrib/ ? General opinion: slightly favorable. > We currently have a number of subdirectories for test-only programs: > > test_parser (a toy text search pa

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Alvaro Herrera writes: > We currently have a number of subdirectories for test-only programs: > test_parser (a toy text search parser, added in 2007) > dummy_seclabel (for SECURITY LABEL regression testing, added Sept 2010) > worker_spi (for bgworkers, added Dec 2012) > test_shm_mq (test program

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

Hi, On 2014-11-24 10:49:45 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I'm now contemplating the addition on a new one in the commit-timestamps > patch, and I'm starting to feel that these are all misplaced. I think > we have been dumping them to contrib not because they really belong > there, but because of

Re: [HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

On 24/11/14 14:49, Alvaro Herrera wrote: I'm now contemplating the addition on a new one in the commit-timestamps patch, and I'm starting to feel that these are all misplaced. I think we have been dumping them to contrib not because they really belong there, but because of the lack of a better p

[HACKERS] no test programs in contrib

What's the general opinion on having test programs somewhere other than contrib/ ? We currently have a number of subdirectories for test-only programs: test_parser (a toy text search parser, added in 2007) dummy_seclabel (for SECURITY LABEL regression testing, added Sept 2010) worker_spi (for bgw