2013-01-31 16:39 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Zolt=E1n_B=F6sz=F6rm=E9nyi?= <z...@cybertec.at> writes:
2013-01-31 15:22 keltezéssel, Alvaro Herrera írta:
That sounds a lot more difficult than just using "make installcheck" and
configure the running server with zero prepared xacts ...
It didn't occur to me to use "make installcheck" for this one.
What is strange though is why prepared_xacts_1.out exists
at all, since pg_regress.c / make check seems to set
max_prepared_transactions on Windows, too.
Alvaro told you why: so that the tests wouldn't report failure in
"make installcheck" against a stock-configuration server.
BTW, 99% of the time you can update alternative expected files by
applying the same patch to them as you did to the tested version.
At least that usually works for me, and it can be a lot easier than
arranging to duplicate the environment the alternative file is
meant for.
regards, tom lane
Thanks. A question though: how does "make check" or "make installcheck"
chooses between the *.out and its different *_N.out incarnations?
I couldn't find traces of prepared_xacts_1.out in any file saying "this
is the one to be used in this-and-this" configuration. Does the procedure
check against all versions and the least different one is reported?
Thanks,
Zoltán Böszörményi
--
----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de
http://www.postgresql.at/
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
