On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 03:23:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > > As I pondered this, I felt it would do better to solve a different problem. > > The "rm -rf" invocations presumably crept in to reduce peak disk usage. > > Considering the relatively-high duration of a successful initdb run, I doubt > > we get good value from so many positive tests. I squashed those positive > > tests into one, as attached. (I changed the order of negative tests but > > kept > > them all.) This removed the need for intra-script cleaning, and it > > accelerated script runtime from 22s to 9s. Does this seem good to you? > > That's a fight code simplicity vs. test performance. FWIW, I like the > test suite with many positive tests because it is easy to read the > test flow. And as this test suite is meant to grow up with new tests > in the future, I am guessing that people may not follow the > restriction this patch adds all the time.
True. > command_fails( > - [ 'initdb', "$tempdir/data", '-X', 'pgxlog' ], > + [ 'initdb', $datadir, '-X', 'pgxlog' ], > 'relative xlog directory not allowed'); > $datadir should be the last argument. This would break on platforms > where src/port/getopt_long.c is used, like Windows. I committed that as a separate patch; thanks. > +command_ok([ 'initdb', '-N', '-T', 'german', '-X', $xlogdir, $datadir ], > + 'successful creation'); > This is grouping the test for nosync, existing nonempty xlog > directory, and the one for selection of the default dictionary. > Shouldn't this test name be updated otherwise then? > > Could you add a comment mentioning that tests are grouped to reduce > I/O impact during a run? Committed with a comment added. The "successful creation" test name is generic because it's the designated place to add testing of new options. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
