Reviewing this thread, I think that the following people are in favor of adding the tests to the existing schedule: Josh Berkus, Stephen Frost, Fabien Coelho, Dann Corbit, and Jeff Janes. And I think that the following people are in favor of a new schedule: Andres Freund, Andrew Dunstan, David Fetter, and possibly Alvaro Herrera. I believe Tom Lane has also expressed objections, though not on this thread.
So I think the first question we need to answer is: Should we just reject Robins' patches en masse? If we do that, then the rest of this is moot. If we don't do that, then the second question is whether we should try to introduce a new schedule, and if so, whether we should split out that new schedule before or after committing these patches as they stand. Here are my opinions, for what they are worth. First, I think that rejecting these new tests is a bad idea, although I've looked them over a bit and I think there might be individual things we might want to take out. Second, I think that creating a new schedule is likely to cost developers more time than it saves them. Sure, you'll be able to run the tests slightly faster, but when you commit something, break the buildfarm (which does run those tests), and then have to go back and fix the tests (or your patch), you'll waste more time doing that than you saved by avoiding those few extra seconds of runtime. Third, I think if we do want to create a new schedule, it makes more sense to commit the tests first and then split out the new schedule according to some criteria that we devise. There should be a principled reason for putting tests in one schedule or the other; "all the tests that Robins Tharakan wrote" is not a good filter criteria. I'm willing to put effort into going through these patches and figuring out which parts are worth committing, and commit them. However, I don't want to (and should not) do that if the consensus is to reject the patches altogether; or if people are not OK with the approach proposed above, namely, commit it first and then, if it causes problems, decide how to fix it. Please help me understand what the way forward is for this patch set. Thanks, -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
