Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:07:45PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On ons, 2011-04-27 at 18:14 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > Enthusiastic +1 for this concept. There's at least one rough edge: it fails if
> > > you have another postmaster running on port 5432.
> >
> > This has now been addressed: pg_upgrade accepts PGPORT settings.
> > Attached is a slightly updated patch runs the test suite with a port of
> > 65432, which you can override by setting PGPORT yourself.
> >
> > Anyway, is this something that people want in the repository? It's not
> > as polished as the pg_regress business, but it is definitely helpful.
>
> I'd like it. We've had bugs sit for months that would have been found
> immediately by a buildfarm member running this test. Having it in the
> repository at least opens up that possibility.
Yep, looks fine to me.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
