Re: Adding CI to our tree

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема Re: Adding CI to our tree
Дата
Msg-id 20220117192510.txue5mihjaxlngep@alap3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Adding CI to our tree  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Adding CI to our tree  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2022-01-17 13:50:04 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 1:19 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > FWIW, to me this shouldn't require a lot of separate manual test
> > invocations. And continuing to have lots of granular test invocations from the
> > buildfarm client is *bad*, because it requires constantly syncing up the set
> > of test targets.
> 
> I have a lot of sympathy with Andrew here, actually. If you just do
> 'make check-world' and assume that will cover everything, you get one
> giant output file. That is not great at all.

I very much agree with check-world output being near unusable.


>  That's really hard to accomplish if you just run all the tests with one
> invocation - any technique you use to find the boundaries between one test's
> output and the next will prove to be unreliable.

I think it's not actually that hard, with something like I described in the
email upthread, with each tests going into a prescribed location, and the
on-disk status being inspectable in an automated way. check-world could invoke
a command to summarize the tests at the end in a .NOTPARALLEL, to make the
local case easier.

pg_regress/isolation style tests have the "summary" output in regression.out,
but we remove it on success.
Tap tests have their output in the regress_log_* files, however these are far
more verbose than the output from running the tests directly.

I wonder if we should keep regression.out and also keep a copy of the
"shorter" tap test output in a file?


> But having said that, I also agree that it sucks to have to keep
> updating the BF client every time we want to do any kind of
> test-related changes in the main source tree.

It also sucks locally. I *hate* having to dig through a long check-world
output to find the first failure.

This subthread is about the windows tests specifically, where it's even worse
- there's no way to run all tests. Nor a list of test targets that's even
halfway complete :/. One just has to know that one has to invoke a myriad of
vcregress.pl taptest path/to/directory

Greetings,

Andres Freund



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tomas Vondra
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Pluggable toaster
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Adding CI to our tree