No, you're reading it backwards: the error is expected, but it's not appearing in your results. I can duplicate this if I manually create database "regress_ecpg_user2" before running ecpg's installcheck, so I guess that's what you did. I can find no evidence that any part of the PG regression tests creates such a database.
Thanks, that makes sense. However, when I go into my database
with psql and type `drop database regress_ecpg_user2;`, the
response is "ERROR: database "regress_ecpg_user2" does not exist".
So it seems either the tests are creating it somehow and then cleaning
it up (though I agree that I found no obvious evidence of that in the
codebase), or could I be looking in the wrong postgres install?
I think it's the same install though. I have my postgres installing into an
install_dir/ directory. Here's how I run configure:
Could that implicitly create a database too? I know that I somehow have a
database named after my username / postgres role "murftown".
I ran "make installcheck-world" again, and, the result is different this time -
a test called "misc_sanity" failed early on in the tests:
$ make installcheck-world make -C src/test installcheck make -C perl installcheck make[2]: Nothing to be done for `installcheck'. make -C regress installcheck
...
============== dropping database "regression" ============== DROP DATABASE ============== creating database "regression" ============== CREATE DATABASE ALTER DATABASE ============== running regression test queries ============== test tablespace ... ok test boolean ... ok test char ... ok
... test regex ... ok test oidjoins ... ok test type_sanity ... ok test opr_sanity ... ok test misc_sanity ... FAILED test comments ... ok test expressions ... ok test insert ... ok test insert_conflict ... ok test create_function_1 ... ok
...
The old failure with the missing error message is gone from regression.diffs this time.