public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
Cc: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 18:32:26 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

Andres Freund <[email protected]> writes:
> On 2023-08-23 17:55:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The trouble with that approach is that in "make installcheck", we
>> don't really want to assume we know what the installed libpq's default
>> connection parameters are.  So we don't explicitly know where that
>> libpq will connect.

> Stepping back: I don't think installcheck matters for the concrete use of
> libpq we're discussing - the only time we wait for server startup is the
> non-installcheck case.

Oh, that's an excellent point.  So for the immediately proposed use-case,
there's no issue.  (We don't have a mode where we try to start a server
using already-installed executables.)

> There are other potential uses for libpq in pg_regress though - I'd e.g. like
> to have a "monitoring" session open, which we could use to detect that the
> server crashed (by waiting for the FD to be become invalid). Where the
> connection default issue could matter more?

Meh.  I don't find that idea compelling enough to justify adding
restrictions on what test scenarios will work.  It's seldom hard to
tell from the test output whether the server crashed.

> I was wondering if we could create an unambiguous connection info, but that
> seems like it'd be hard to do, without creating cross version hazards.

Hmm, we don't expect the regression test suite to work against other
server versions, so maybe that could be made to work --- that is, we
could run the psql under test and get a full set of connection
parameters out of it?  But I'm still not finding this worth the
trouble.

> What's the reason we don't force psql to come from the same build as
> pg_regress?

Because the point of installcheck is to check the installed binaries
--- including the installed psql and libpq.

(Thinks for a bit...)  Maybe we should add pg_regress to the installed
fileset, and use that copy not the in-tree copy for installcheck?
Then we could assume it's using the same libpq as psql.  IIRC there
have already been suggestions to do that for the benefit of PGXS
testing.

			regards, tom lane

view thread (13+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

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: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox