Re: Problem with dblink regression test

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: decibel(at)decibel(dot)org, mail(at)joeconway(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Problem with dblink regression test
Date: 2005-06-22 04:35:35
Message-ID: 23081.1119414935@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> If this diagnosis were correct, wouldn't every buildfarm member be failing
> at the ContribCheck stage (if they get that far)?

I am way too tired right now to run down the details, but there is a
series of possibilities for the port libpq will try to connect to,
and I think what is happening is that one of the lower-priority choices
is causing it to connect to an existing installed postmaster instead of
the intended test installation. Anyone want to do the legwork to
explain this clearly?

> Also, while the PGPORT=nnnn trick looks sort of OK, we need to check it will
> work on Windows - I am far from sure it will.

Yeah, the Windows case has its own all-new set of gotchas ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2005-06-22 05:12:49 Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-06-22 04:27:02 Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2005-06-22 05:12:49 Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-06-22 04:27:02 Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity