ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?=) writes:
> Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>> Yeah, I'd noticed those on previous readings of the patch. They'd almost
>> certainly fail on some of our older/smaller buildfarm members, so they're
>> not getting committed, even if they didn't require multiple seconds apiece
>> to run (even on a machine with plenty of memory). It's useful to have
>> them for initial testing though.
> Perl's test suite has a similar issue with tests for handling of huge
> strings, hashes, arrays, regexes etc. We've taken the approach of
> checking the environment variable PERL_TEST_MEMORY and skipping tests
> that need more than that many gigabytes. We currently have tests that
> check for values from 1 all the way up to 96 GiB.
> This would be trivial to do in the Postgres TAP tests, but something
> similar might feasible in the pg_regress too?
Meh. The memory is only part of it; the other problem is that multiple
seconds expended in every future run of the regression tests is a price
that's many orders of magnitude higher than the potential value of this
test case.
regards, tom lane
