On 5/31/15 11:49 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 09:51:04PM -0400, David Steele wrote:
>> On 5/30/15 8:38 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> On 05/30/2015 03:48 PM, David Steele wrote:
>>>> I would argue Heikki's WAL stuff is a perfect case for releasing a
>>>> public alpha/beta soon. I'd love to test PgBackRest with an "official"
>>>> 9.5dev build. The PgBackRest test suite has lots of tests that run on
>>>> versions 8.3+ and might well shake out any bugs that are lying around.
>>>
>>> You are right. Clone git, run it nightly automated and please, please
>>> report anything you find. There is no reason for a tagged release for
>>> that. Consider it a custom, purpose built, build-test farm.
>>
>> Sure - I can write code to do that. But then why release a beta at all?
>
> It's largely for the benefit of folks planning manual, or otherwise high-cost,
> testing. If you budget for just one big test per year, make it a test of
> beta1. For inexpensive testing, you may as well ignore beta and test git
> master daily or weekly.
I've gotten to the point of (relatively) high-cost coding/testing. The
removal of checkpoint_segments and pause_on_recovery are leading to
refactoring of not only the regressions tests but the actual backup
code. 9.5 and 8.3 are the only versions that require exceptions in the
code base.
I've already done basic testing against 9.5 by disabling certain tests.Now I'm at the point where I need to start
modifyingcode to take new
9.5 features/changes into account and make sure the regression tests
work for 8.3-9.5 with the fewest number of exceptions possible.
From the perspective of backup/restore testing, 9.5 has the most changes
since 9.0. I'd like to know that the API at least is stable before
investing the time in new development.
Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding the nature of the discussion.
--
- David Steele
david@pgmasters.net