Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Date: 2010-08-11 15:53:37
Message-ID: 4C62C781.1090004@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 08/11/2010 11:42 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On ons, 2010-08-11 at 10:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> One of us is missing something. I didn't say to run the checks using
>> the
>>> configured port. I had in mind something like:
>>> port = 0xC000 | ((PG_VERSION_NUM + DEF_PGPORT)& 0x3FFF);
>> Oh, I see, modify the DEF_PGPORT don't just use it as-is. OK, except
>> that I think something like the above is still pretty risky for the
>> buildfarm, because you would still have conflicts for assorted
>> combinations of version numbers and branch_port settings.
>>
>> How about just this:
>>
>> port = 0xC000 | (DEF_PGPORT& 0x3FFF);
> The version number was put in there intentionally, for developers who
> work on multiple branches at once. That's the whole reason this code
> exists. Please don't remove it.
>

Do they run "make check" by hand simultaneously on multiple branches?
That's the only way you'd get a collision here, I think.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-08-11 15:55:52 Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-08-11 15:53:22 Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment