Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qS40F-0046JK-Sv for buildfarm-members@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 04 Aug 2023 23:14:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qS40C-00BUY1-9j for buildfarm-members@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 04 Aug 2023 23:14:36 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qS40B-00BUXt-Ud for buildfarm-members@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 04 Aug 2023 23:14:36 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qS404-000Zmu-Ny for buildfarm-members@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 04 Aug 2023 23:14:34 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 374NEPr93951995; Fri, 4 Aug 2023 19:14:25 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Andrew Dunstan cc: "buildfarm-members@lists.postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Release 17 of the PostgreSQL Buildfarm Client In-reply-to: <6e00da65-f0dc-3fa7-8b06-49385e08d05c@dunslane.net> References: <6e00da65-f0dc-3fa7-8b06-49385e08d05c@dunslane.net> Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan message dated "Fri, 04 Aug 2023 11:23:11 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <3951993.1691190865.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2023 19:14:25 -0400 Message-ID: <3951994.1691190865@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Andrew Dunstan writes: > I have pushed Release 17 of the PostgreSQL Buildfarm client. I ran a test of this using run_branches.pl --run-all --nosend --force and noticed that it created "animal.force-one-run" files in each of the per-branch directories, and never removed them. This means (I assume) that the next run will also behave like --force ... and maybe all later ones too, until I manually remove those files? I'm not sure if this behavior is new in v17, or I just never tried it before. I usually create force-one-run files manually. regards, tom lane