Horton

Re: Improving isolationtester's data output

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2021-06-16T15:14:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2021-Jun-16, Tom Lane wrote:

> Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> > I'm +1 for back-patching this class of change.  I've wasted time adapting a
> > back-patch's test case to account for non-back-patched test infrastructure
> > changes.  Every back-patch of test infrastructure has been a strict win from
> > my perspective.
> 
> Hearing few objections, I'll plan on back-patching.  I'm thinking that the
> best thing to do is apply these changes after beta2 wraps, but before we
> branch v14.

Great.

> BTW, as long as we're thinking of back-patching nontrivial specfile
> changes, I have another modest proposal.  What do people think of
> removing the requirement for step/session names to be double-quoted,
> and instead letting them work like SQL identifiers?

Yes *please*.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera       Valdivia, Chile
"[PostgreSQL] is a great group; in my opinion it is THE best open source
development communities in existence anywhere."                (Lamar Owen)

Commits

  1. Improve display of query results in isolation tests.

  2. Detect unused steps in isolation specs and do some cleanup

  3. Remove dry-run mode from isolationtester