Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se> writes:
> 1) As I said earlier I think we should remove the old code.
I agree that carrying two versions of the test doesn't seem great.
However, a large part of the purpose of test_sepgsql is to help
people debug their sepgsql setup, which is why it goes to great
lengths to print helpful error messages. I'm worried that making
it into a TAP test will degrade the usefulness of that, simply
because the TAP infrastructure is pretty damn unfriendly when it
comes to figuring out why a test failed. You have to know where
to even look for the test logfile, and then you have to ignore
a bunch of useless-to-you chatter. I'm not sure if there is much
we can do to improve that. (Although if we could, it would
yield benefits across the whole tree.)
OTOH, I suspect there are so few people using sepgsql that this
doesn't matter too much. Probably most of them will be advanced
hackers who won't blink at digging through a TAP log. We should
update the docs to explain that though.
regards, tom lane
