Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Date
Msg-id 4C62C781.1090004@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 08/11/2010 11:42 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On ons, 2010-08-11 at 10:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> One of us is missing something. I didn't say to run the checks using
>> the
>>> configured port. I had in mind something like:
>>>       port = 0xC000 | ((PG_VERSION_NUM + DEF_PGPORT)&   0x3FFF);
>> Oh, I see, modify the DEF_PGPORT don't just use it as-is.  OK, except
>> that I think something like the above is still pretty risky for the
>> buildfarm, because you would still have conflicts for assorted
>> combinations of version numbers and branch_port settings.
>>
>> How about just this:
>>
>>       port = 0xC000 | (DEF_PGPORT&  0x3FFF);
> The version number was put in there intentionally, for developers who
> work on multiple branches at once.  That's the whole reason this code
> exists.  Please don't remove it.
>

Do they run "make check" by hand simultaneously on multiple branches? 
That's the only way you'd get a collision here, I think.

cheers

andrew


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment