On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 11:23:18PM +0300, Marina Polyakova wrote:
> On 2023-05-15 19:16, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmm. I'd actually fix the blame on transactions.sql here. Creating
>> a table named as generically as "abc" is horribly bad practice in
>> a set of concurrent tests. namespace.sql is arguably okay, since
>> it's creating that table name in a private schema.
>>
>> I'd be inclined to fix this by doing s/abc/something-else/g in
>> transactions.sql.
>
> Maybe use a separate schema for all new objects in the transaction test?..
> See diff_set_tx_schema.patch.
Sure, you could do that to bypass the failure (without the "public"
actually?), leaving non-generic names around. Still I'd agree with
Tom here and just rename the objects to something more in line with
the context of the test to make things a bit more greppable. These
could be renamed as transaction_tab or transaction_view, for example.
--
Michael