On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 12:09:16PM -0400, David Steele wrote:
> On 5/31/15 11:49 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 09:51:04PM -0400, David Steele wrote:
> >> Sure - I can write code to do that. But then why release a beta at all?
> >
> > It's largely for the benefit of folks planning manual, or otherwise high-cost,
> > testing. If you budget for just one big test per year, make it a test of
> > beta1. For inexpensive testing, you may as well ignore beta and test git
> > master daily or weekly.
>
> I've gotten to the point of (relatively) high-cost coding/testing. The
> removal of checkpoint_segments and pause_on_recovery are leading to
> refactoring of not only the regressions tests but the actual backup
> code. 9.5 and 8.3 are the only versions that require exceptions in the
> code base.
>
> I've already done basic testing against 9.5 by disabling certain tests.
> Now I'm at the point where I need to start modifying code to take new
> 9.5 features/changes into account and make sure the regression tests
> work for 8.3-9.5 with the fewest number of exceptions possible.
Release of beta1 is the cue for that sort of work.
> From the perspective of backup/restore testing, 9.5 has the most changes
> since 9.0. I'd like to know that the API at least is stable before
> investing the time in new development.
Its API will be as good as pgsql-hackers could make it; beta1 is also a call
for help discovering API problems we overlooked. Subsequent API changes are
usually reactions to beta test reports.
