Hello!
On 06.07.2022 08:58, Michael Paquier wrote:
> That's the kind of things I already proposed on this thread, aimed at
> improving the coverage, and this takes care of more issues than what's
> proposed here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/Yox1ME99GhAemMq1(at)paquier(dot)xyz
> I'll rebase my patch to include fixes for --wal-segsize and
> --allow-group-access when using versions older than v11.
> --
> Michael
Thanks!
I looked at this thread and tried to apply some changes from it in practice.
And found one strange error and describe it in a comment here:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cc7e961a-d5ad-8c6d-574b-478aacc11cf7%40inbox.ru
It would be interesting to know if it occures on
my PC only or somewhere else.
On 05.07.2022 22:08, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> ..since it tries to apply all the *.patch files to the master branch, one after
> another. For branches other than master, I suggest to name the patches *.txt
> or similar. Or, just focus for now on allowing upgrades *to* master. I'm not
> sure if anyone is interested in patching test.sh in backbranches. I'm not
> sure, but there may be more interest to backpatch the conversion to TAP
> (322becb60).
>
Yes, the backport idea seems to be interesting. I wrote more about this in a new thread:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/e2b1f3a0-4fda-ba72-5535-2d0395b9e68f%40inbox.ru
as the current topic has nothing to do with the backport of TAP tests.
With best regards,
--
Anton A. Melnikov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
