Re: Allow passing extra options to initdb for tests - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ian Lawrence Barwick
Subject Re: Allow passing extra options to initdb for tests
Date
Msg-id CAB8KJ=jpm2xxWZWUp7hfq+7m2cGr+HN4V_nNqHG0--16=EAazQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Allow passing extra options to initdb for tests  (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>)
Responses Re: Allow passing extra options to initdb for tests
List pgsql-hackers
2024年2月6日(火) 19:54 Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>:
>
> I'm proposing here a way to pass extra options to initdb when run
> internally during test setup in pg_regress or
> PostgreSQL::Test::Cluster's init (which covers just about all test
> suites other than initdb's own tests).
>
> For example:
>
>      make check PG_TEST_INITDB_EXTRA_OPTS='-k -c work_mem=50MB'
>
> We currently document at [0] a way to pass custom server settings to the
> tests via PGOPTIONS.  But this only works for pg_regress and only for
> options that can be changed at run time.  My proposal can set initdb
> options, and since initdb has the -c option now, it can set any GUC
> parameter as well.
>
> I think this can be useful for a wide variety of uses, like running all
> tests with checksums enabled, or with JIT enabled, or with different GUC
> settings, or with different locale settings.  (The existing pg_regress
> --no-locale option is essentially a special case of this, but it only
> provides one particular locale setting, not things like changing the
> default provider etc.)
>
> Of course, not all tests are going to pass with arbitrary options, but
> it is useful to run this against specific test suites.
>
> This patch also updates the documentation at [0] to explain the new
> method and distinguish it from the previously documented methods.

+1 for this, I recently ran into an issue with the regression tests for an
extension where it would have been very useful to provide some initdb
options.

Patch works as expected after a quick initial test.

Regards

Ian Barwick



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: jian he
Date:
Subject: Re: clarify equalTupleDescs()
Next
From: Peter Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby