Re: Cleanup isolation specs from unused steps

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: Cleanup isolation specs from unused steps
Дата
Msg-id 20190823015316.GC2328@paquier.xyz
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Cleanup isolation specs from unused steps  (Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Cleanup isolation specs from unused steps  (Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 10:20:48AM -0700, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> So, there is some historical context as to why it is a separate test suite.
> And some of the differences are specific to Greenplum -- e.g. needing to
> connect to a specific database in "utility mode" to do something.

What is "utility mode"?

> The syntax for what would be a "step" in isolation is like this:
>
> [<#>[flag]:] <sql> | ! <shell scripts or command>
>
> where # is the session number and flags include the following:
>
> &: expect blocking behavior
> >: running in background without blocking
> <: join an existing session
> q: quit the given session

These could be transposed as new meta commands for the existing
specs?  Of course not as "step" per-se, but new dedicated commands?

> See the script [1] for parsing the test cases for more details on the
> syntax and capabilities (it is in Python).

Hmm.  The bar to add a new hard language dependency in the test
suites is very high.  I am not sure that we'd want something with a
python dependency for the tests, also knowing how Python likes
breaking compatibility (isolation2_main() also mentions a dependency
to Python).
--
Michael

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Ashwin Agrawal
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Comment in ginpostinglist.c doesn't match code
Следующее
От: Masahiko Sawada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks