Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?
Date
Msg-id 3557216.1692824571@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Responses Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?
Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?
List pgsql-hackers
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
> On 23 Aug 2023, at 21:22, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> I think there's more effective ways to make this cheaper. The basic thing
>> would be to use libpq instead of forking of psql to make a connection
>> check.

> I had it in my head that not using libpq in pg_regress was a deliberate choice,
> but I fail to find a reference to it in the archives.

I have a vague feeling that you are right about that.  Perhaps the
concern was that under "make installcheck", pg_regress might be
using a build-tree copy of libpq rather than the one from the
system under test.  As long as we're just trying to ping the server,
that shouldn't matter too much I think ... unless we hit problems
with, say, a different default port number or socket path compiled into
one copy vs. the other?  That seems like it's probably a "so don't
do that" case, though.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Date:
Subject: Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 16 release announcement draft