On 04/23/2017 10:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> AFAICT, unlike the pg_regress checks, which in the installcheck case run >> against a running instance of postgres, for TAP tests the only >> difference is that that for the check case a temp install is done, >> possibly with some extra contrib modules. Is that correct? If is is, why >> aren't we providing an installcheck target for tests like recover. In at >> least one case (buildfarmn jacana) installs are quite expensive (2 or 3 >> minutes) and if they are pointless as seems to be the case here why >> can't we just avoid them? > A lot of those test cases involve setting non-default configuration > parameters and/or stopping/starting the postmaster. So I can't see how > we would run them against a pre-existing live cluster, which is the usual > meaning of "make installcheck". > > I think what you're imagining is skipping redundant builds of the > "tmp_install" tree by using an installation tree with a temporary $PGDATA > directory. That seems like a fine idea, but we need another word for it. > >
That's actually the current meaning of installcheck w.r.t. TAP. See Makefile.global.in. It's what we run (mostly) in the buildfarm for the bin tests. I agree entirely that it's confusing as heck. +1 for inventing a new name. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
