Subject: Re: Very confusing installcheck behavior with PGXS
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <56899F36.9000607@BlueTreble.com>
 <CA+TgmoaKJFjY-=A6x3Qhk2Sf7egQG3=FdSUdzTCQtogYbBGyCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5651.1452102882@sss.pgh.pa.us> <568E7829.2050805@BlueTreble.com>
 <12108.1452178021@sss.pgh.pa.us> <568E7B4A.4080003@BlueTreble.com>
 <13036.1452179541@sss.pgh.pa.us> <568E8317.3000806@BlueTreble.com>
 <29567.1452182165@sss.pgh.pa.us> <568EA3A6.7080309@BlueTreble.com>
 <11232.1452188946@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
From: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>
Message-ID: <568EA775.2080509@BlueTreble.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:59:17 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:38.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <11232.1452188946@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: bluetreble.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:23
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2016 17:59:22.8176 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR11MB0685
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers>
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>
List-ID: <pgsql-hackers.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 1/7/16 11:49 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> writes:
>> input and output are used in only 3 places in the whole tree[1], so
>> maybe the best thing to do is just rip support for that out of
>> pg_regress and handle it some other way.
>
> [ raised eyebrow ]  It's not apparent to me that moving it someplace else
> would reduce the net cruft any.

What it would do is de-mystify that part of pg_regress. I agree that 
vpath is a particular problem for input/ and output/, but it's even 
worse when most everyone thinks sql/ and expected/ are inputs to 
pg_regress, and not potential outputs.

> The real problem is that Peter just did the minimum amount of work
> to get VPATH to work at all, not to get it to work in a non-surprising
> way.  We really need this code to be explicitly VPATH-aware, I think,
> rather than overloading the inputdir and outputdir concepts in
> multiple ways.

Agreed, especially because if it's not then if you try to use both 
input/ and sql/ or output/ and expected/ you're not going to get the 
results you'd like.

If we want to keep input/ and output/ inside pg_regress then I think 
what needs to happen in a vpath build is to first create $vpath/sql and 
$vpath/expected, copy anything from $(uh... source?)/sql and /expected 
there, and then process /input and /output (and deal with any duplicate 
file references).
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers