Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto
Date
Msg-id 20070208092753.GT64372@nasby.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 02:16:05PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org> writes:
> > On Feb 6, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> ... massive expansion of the tests doesn't seem justified
> 
> > What about the idea that's been floated in the past about a -- 
> > extensive mode for regression testing that would (generally) only be  
> > used by the build farm. That would mean others wouldn't have to  
> > suffer through extremely long make check's.
> 
> > Or is there another reason not to expand the tests?
> 
> I'm not concerned so much about the runtime as the development and
> maintenance effort...

I can see development... but are there enough changes where the
maintenance would be an issue?
-- 
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Reduce WAL activity for page splits: > Currently, an index split
Next
From: "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD"
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp