From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
        Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take three -
 remastered set
In-reply-to: <0f70fc0f-c51a-7a58-7e12-c702352eb076@dunslane.net>
References: <YJ8xTmLQkotVLpN5@paquier.xyz>
 <cb0bfbb9-a3bb-c43a-73bd-651e801193f2@dunslane.net>
 <YKHNLQlZYMxL7wBO@paquier.xyz>
 <e3d251fc-b3b1-d254-2b4f-70a6dcce5b29@dunslane.net>
 <YKMcbKePfS6BHKXz@paquier.xyz> <YKX8vOWo9iov7BJw@paquier.xyz>
 <YVaohuWPb3oDl4nn@paquier.xyz>
 <b8293b8c-2814-723c-5fdb-4496f3983cf8@dunslane.net>
 <3715954.1633208613@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <0f70fc0f-c51a-7a58-7e12-c702352eb076@dunslane.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
	message dated "Sat, 02 Oct 2021 23:32:36 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3735234.1633232078.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2021 23:34:38 -0400
Message-ID: <3735235.1633232078@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3735235.1633232078%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 10/2/21 5:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> IIUC, the only problem for a non-updated animal would be that it'd
>> run the test twice?  Or would it actually fail?  If the latter,
>> we'd need to sit on the patch rather longer.

> The patch removes test.sh, so yes it would break.

Maybe we could leave test.sh in place for awhile?  I'd rather
not cause a flag day for buildfarm owners.  (Also, how do we
see this working in the back branches?)

			regards, tom lane