From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Subject: Re: Adding CI to our tree
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2022 15:09:20 -0500
Message-ID: <2723724.1644782960@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220213191456.gdrhfu7vhvaifypd@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20220117201619.3ltudwhgk2krmoki@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20220118210847.GC23027@telsasoft.com>
<20220203035827.GG23027@telsasoft.com>
<20220203195718.smqo5xg4ygp5qktq@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20220204050403.GL23027@telsasoft.com>
<20220213012008.4wpqzyszxu3z22d2@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20220213051937.GO31460@telsasoft.com>
<20220213083006.f2wulffsxr5zfwc4@alap3.anarazel.de>
<CA+TgmoYbN=mkUcm_BY2VBqpJTqz4e81C3NXWjqayg6i_xnrRWg@mail.gmail.com>
<2597660.1644772397@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20220213191456.gdrhfu7vhvaifypd@alap3.anarazel.de>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2022-02-13 12:13:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Right. Can we set things up so that it's not too painful to inject
>> custom build options into a CI build?
> What kind of injection are you thinking about?
That's exactly what needs to be decided.
> A patch author can obviously
> just add options in .cirrus.yml. That's something possible now, that was not
> possible with cfbot applying its own .cirrus.yml
Fine, but are committers supposed to keep track of the fact that they
shouldn't commit that part of a patch? I'd prefer something a bit more
out-of-band. I don't know this technology well enough to propose a way.
> I'd like to have things like -fanitize=aligned and
> -DWRITE_READ_PARSE_PLAN_TREES on by default for CI, primarily for cfbot's
> benefit. Most patch authors won't know about using
> -DWRITE_READ_PARSE_PLAN_TREES etc, so they won't even think about enabling
> them. We're *really* not doing well on the "timely review" side of things, so
> we at least should not waste time on high latency back-forth for easily
> automatically detectable things.
I don't personally have an objection to either of those; maybe Robert
does.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, robertmhaas@gmail.com, pryzby@telsasoft.com, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, andrew@dunslane.net, thomas.munro@gmail.com, melanieplageman@gmail.com, peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com, daniel@yesql.se
Subject: Re: Adding CI to our tree
In-Reply-To: <2723724.1644782960@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox