Re: Broken defenses against dropping a partitioning column - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Broken defenses against dropping a partitioning column
Date
Msg-id 19063.1563830235@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Broken defenses against dropping a partitioning column  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2019-Jul-22, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I nearly missed the need for that because of all the noise that
>> check-world emits in pre-v12 branches.  We'd discussed back-patching
>> eb9812f27 at the time, and I think now it's tested enough that doing
>> so is low risk (or at least, lower risk than the risk of not seeing
>> a failure).  So I think I'll go do that now.

> I'd like that, as it bites me too, thanks.

Done.  The approach "make check-world >/dev/null" now emits the
same amount of noise on all branches, ie just

NOTICE:  database "regression" does not exist, skipping


The amount of parallelism you can apply is still pretty
branch-dependent, unfortunately.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: make libpq documentation navigable between functions
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: initdb recommendations