On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 11:05 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think we are often too quick to throw out perfectly good tests.
> Citing that some similar GUCs don't do testing as a reason to skip
> them just seems to me like an example of "two wrongs don't make a
> right".
>
> There is a third option.
>
> Keep the tests. Because they take excessive time to run, that simply
> means you should run them *conditionally* based on the PG_TEST_EXTRA
> environment variable so they don't impact the normal BF execution. The
> documentation [1] says this env var is for "resource intensive" tests
> -- AFAIK this is exactly the scenario we find ourselves in, so is
> exactly what this env var was meant for.
>
> Search other *.pl tests for PG_TEST_EXTRA to see some examples.
>
I don't see the long-running tests to be added under PG_TEST_EXTRA as
that will make it unusable after some point. Now, if multiple senior
members feel it is okay to add long-running tests under PG_TEST_EXTRA
then I am open to considering it. We can keep this test as a separate
patch so that the patch is being tested in CI or in manual tests
before commit.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
