Re: postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc
Date
Msg-id 56C31619.6040104@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 02/15/2016 07:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 07:31:40PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Oh, crap.  I didn't realize that TEMP_CONFIG didn't affect the contrib
>>> test suites.  Is there any reason for that, or is it just kinda where
>>> we ended up?
>> To my knowledge, it's just the undesirable place we ended up.
> Yeah.  +1 for fixing that, if it's not unreasonably painful.
>
>             


+1 for fixing it everywhere.

Historical note: back when TEMP_CONFIG was implemented, the main 
regression set was just about the only set of tests the buildfarm ran 
using a temp install. That wasn't even available for contrib and the 
PLs, IIRC.

cheers

andrew






pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Kajaba
Date:
Subject: Packaging of postgresql-jdbc
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove or weaken hints about "effective resolution of sleep delays is 10 ms"?