Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-24 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 07/24/2015 01:21 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Michael Paquier mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Peter Eisentraut mailto:pete...@gmx.net>> wrote: > On 7/21/15 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I agree; this change

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-24 Thread Jeff Janes
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: > > On 7/21/15 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I agree; this change may have seemed like a good idea at the time, but > >> it was not. Failures during "make check"'s install step

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 7/21/15 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I agree; this change may have seemed like a good idea at the time, but >> it was not. Failures during "make check"'s install step are rare enough >> that you don't really need all that output in yo

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > OK, looks sane enough. but please do address the other issue. Okidoki. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hacke

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 7/21/15 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > I agree; this change may have seemed like a good idea at the time, but > it was not. Failures during "make check"'s install step are rare enough > that you don't really need all that output in your face to help with the > rare situation where it fails. And f

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 07/21/2015 01:39 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Regarding install.log, the use of stdout/stderr instead of a log file >> has been changed in dbf2ec1a after that: >> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/553fe7fc.2040...@gmx.net >> Since 9.5 as the location of the temporar

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 07/21/2015 01:39 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: Somewhere along the way some changes to the way we do "make check" have caused a significant deterioration in the buildfarm's logging. Compare these two from animal crake, wh

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: > >> > Regarding initdb.log and postmaster.log, this is definitely a bug. >> > Those have been moved by dcae5fa from log/ to tmp_check/log/, >> > tmp_check

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-07-21 14:39:42 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > Regarding initdb.log and postmaster.log, this is definitely a bug. > > Those have been moved by dcae5fa from log/ to tmp_check/log/, > > tmp_check/ getting removed at the end of pg_regress if there are no > > failures c

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Andres Freund
On 2015-07-21 14:39:42 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Regarding initdb.log and postmaster.log, this is definitely a bug. > Those have been moved by dcae5fa from log/ to tmp_check/log/, > tmp_check/ getting removed at the end of pg_regress if there are no > failures counted. FWIW, I think that's b

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-21 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > > Regarding initdb.log and postmaster.log, this is definitely a bug. > > Those have been moved by dcae5fa from log/ to tmp_check/log/, > > tmp_check/ getting removed at the end of pg_regress if there are no > > f

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-20 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Andrew Dunstan writes: >>> Somewhere along the way some changes to the way we do "make check" have >>> caused a significant deterioration in the buildfarm's logging. Compare >>> these tw

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-20 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: >> Somewhere along the way some changes to the way we do "make check" have >> caused a significant deterioration in the buildfarm's logging. Compare >> these two from animal crake, which happens to be my test instance: >> <

Re: [HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-20 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > Somewhere along the way some changes to the way we do "make check" have > caused a significant deterioration in the buildfarm's logging. Compare > these two from animal crake, which happens to be my test instance: >

[HACKERS] "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.

2015-07-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Somewhere along the way some changes to the way we do "make check" have caused a significant deterioration in the buildfarm's logging. Compare these two from animal crake, which happens to be my test instance: