Re: Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Steele
Subject Re: Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two
Date
Msg-id 0b59536a-2d31-7573-6505-1860d00618bd@pgmasters.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 3/6/18 4:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> On 3/4/18 16:09, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> If you want to do this soon I can put out a Buildfarm Client release
>>> fairly quickly.
> 
>> I think the dependency is mostly the other way around.  How quickly
>> would build farm owners install the upgrade?
> 
> IIUC, the buildfarm script patch is only needed to avoid duplicate
> tests.  So owners need only install it if they want to reduce wasted
> cycles on their machines.  That being the case, it's only urgent to
> the extent that the individual owner perceives it to be.  Some might
> think it is so, so I'd like to see the BF release available before
> we push the TAP test ... but we don't have to wait very long between.

It seems the consensus is that we'll need a build farm update before we
can move forward with the patch and that we don't need to wait long for
people to upgrade.

Andrew, do you have a date for the next release?

Thanks,
-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Steele
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Boolean partitions syntax
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: Hash join in SELECT target list expression keeps consuming memory