Feedback-ID: ia2694551:Fastmail
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 19:12:58 +0100
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>,
	Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>,
	Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Test to dump and restore objects left behind by regression
Message-ID: <202503281812.33bmlx2yuy7w@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <2368895.1743171728@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202503281812.33bmlx2yuy7w%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2025-Mar-28, Tom Lane wrote:

> I think instead of going this direction, we really need to create a
> separately-purposed script that simply creates "one of everything"
> without doing anything else (except maybe loading a little data).
> I believe it'd be a lot easier to remember to add to that when
> inventing new SQL than to remember to leave something behind from the
> core regression tests.  This would also be far faster to run than any
> approach that involves picking a random subset of the core test
> scripts.

FWIW this sounds closely related to what I tried to do with
src/test/modules/test_ddl_deparse; it's currently incomplete, but maybe
we can use that as a starting point.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Always assume the user will do much worse than the stupidest thing
you can imagine."                                (Julien PUYDT)