Horton

Re: Regression tests vs existing users in an installation

Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-07-18T05:34:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> We could also do this by loading a C module during the regression
> tests, which seems maybe less ugly than adding a GUC.
> I don't particularly like your suggestion of spooky action at a
> distance between force_parallel_mode and regression_test_mode.  That
> just seems kooky.

One downside of the plugin is that any users willing to do make
installcheck would need to install it as well.
-- 
Michael

Commits

  1. Move rolenames test out of the core regression tests.

  2. Add an enforcement mechanism for global object names in regression tests.

  3. Fix regression tests to use only global names beginning with "regress_".

  4. Disallow user-created replication origins named "pg_xxx".