Andrew Dunstan writes:
> What's the preferred way to set that?
> "configure CPPFLAGS=-DENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS"?
longfin is doing it via config_env. I have no opinion on whether
that's the "preferred" way.
regards, tom lane
On Wed, Dec 25, 2019 at 12:56 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 10:17:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Yeah, it's sort of annoying that the buildfarm didn't notice this
> > aspect of things. I'm not sure I want to spend cycles on checking
> > it in every test run, though.
> >
>
On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 10:17:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, it's sort of annoying that the buildfarm didn't notice this
> aspect of things. I'm not sure I want to spend cycles on checking
> it in every test run, though.
>
> Maybe we could have -DENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS
> e
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 02:42:22PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I notice in testing this that the "nosuper" business added by
>> 6136e94dc is broken in more ways than what the buildfarm is
>> complaining about: it leaves the role around at the end of the
>> test.
> Roles le
On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 02:42:22PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Concretely, I think we ought to do (and back-patch) the attached.
Thanks for the fix, I have not been able to look at that.
> I notice in testing this that the "nosuper" business added by
> 6136e94dc is broken in more ways than what the
I wrote:
> This is a bit messier. But I think that the discrepancy is not
> really the fault of this patch: rather, it's a bug in the way the
> GSS support was put into libpq. I thought we had a policy that
> all builds would recognize all possible parameters and then
> perhaps fail later. Certa
[ redirecting to -hackers ]
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 05:55:10AM +, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Superuser can permit passwordless connections on postgres_fdw
> After this commit a couple of buildfarm animals are unhappy with the
> regression tests of postgres_fdw:
Yeah,
