Re: Regression tests and NOTICE statements
От | Rod Taylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Regression tests and NOTICE statements |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 292c01c1f755$f45a3d40$ad02000a@jester обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Regression tests and NOTICE statements ("Rod Taylor" <rbt@zort.ca>) |
Ответы |
Re: Regression tests and NOTICE statements
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> "Rod Taylor" <rbt@zort.ca> writes: > > installcheck will continue to fail if not run immediatly after an > > initdb however. > > Not acceptable. Quite aside from it not being okay to force an initdb > to do a regression test, any tiny change to any part of the regress > tests will probably alter OID assignments in later tests. The above is the reason I proposed turning off NOTICE statements. From what I can see 99% of them aren't useful. The tests confirm the information that NOTICE gives off in better ways anyway. With them off, the sudo-random names simply aren't shown anywhere. Only the effects of the constraints (of any type) are seen. > Why are you inserting OIDs into constraint names anyway? I thought > we had just agreed that the RI trigger naming arrangement was a bad idea > and we should change it. Oh. I didn't know it was a bad idea (aside from being a little OID wasteful). Ok, I need something guarenteed unique, system generated, and I really didn't like the way CHECK constraints test a name, increment a counter, test the new name, increment a counter, test yet another name, increament a counter, ..... So.. Is there a good way to do this? Or was the above CHECK constraint method of testing ~10 different names with each creation good enough.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: