Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
| От | Andrew Dunstan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4C62AD47.9070305@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/11/2010 09:43 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> On 08/11/2010 12:42 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> ... However, it does seem like we ought to be able to
>>> do something about two buildfarm critters defaulting to the same choice
>>> of port number.
>> Why not just add the configured port (DEF_PGPORT) into the calculation
>> of the port to run on?
> No, that would be just about the worst possible choice. It'd be
> guaranteed to fail in the standard scenario that you are running
> "make check" before updating an existing installation.
One of us is missing something. I didn't say to run the checks using the
configured port. I had in mind something like:
port = 0xC000 | ((PG_VERSION_NUM + DEF_PGPORT) & 0x3FFF);
cheers
andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: