Re: TAP tests aren't using the magic words for Windows file access - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Juan José Santamaría Flecha
Subject Re: TAP tests aren't using the magic words for Windows file access
Date
Msg-id CAC+AXB30i3aG7-tbq46Jo573R5ZT8zrjF03KA2aUjbjq+HiwNw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: TAP tests aren't using the magic words for Windows file access  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: TAP tests aren't using the magic words for Windows file access  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 9:00 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 08:09:38PM +0100, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
> I think Perl's open() is a bad candidate for an overload, so I will update
> the previous patch that only touches slurp_file().

FWIW, I don't like much the approach of patching only slurp_file().
What gives us the guarantee that we won't have this discussion again
in a couple of months or years once a new caller of open() is added
for some new TAP tests, and that it has the same problems with
multi-process concurrency?


I agree on that, from a technical stand point, overloading open() is probably the best solution for the reasons above mentioned. My doubts come from the effort such a solution will take and its maintainability, also taking into account that there are not that many calls to open() in "src/test/perl".

Regards,

Juan José Santamaría Flecha 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Konstantin Knizhnik
Date:
Subject: Re: Why overhead of SPI is so large?
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum