Обсуждение: [HACKERS] bug/oversight in TestLib.pm and PostgresNode.pm
I am trying to re-create pgbench-over-logical-replication as a TAP-test. (the wisdom of that might be doubted, and I appreciate comments on it too, but it's really another subject). While trying to test pgbench's stderr (looking for 'creating tables' in output of the initialisation step) I ran into these two bugs (or perhaps better 'oversights'). But especially the omission of command_fails_like() in PostgresNode.pm feels like an bug. In the end it was necessary to change TestLib.pm's command_like() because command_fails_like() also checks for a non-zero return value (which seems to make sense, but in this case not possible: pgbench returns 0 on init with output on stderr). make check-world passes without error Thanks, Erik Rijkers -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Вложения
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:51 AM, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl> wrote: > While trying to test pgbench's stderr (looking for 'creating tables' in > output of the initialisation step) I ran into these two bugs (or perhaps > better 'oversights'). + if (defined $expected_stderr) { + like($stderr, $expected_stderr, "$test_name: stderr matches"); + } + else { is($stderr, '', "$test_name: no stderr"); - like($stdout, $expected_stdout, "$test_name: matches"); + } To simplify that you could as well set expected_output to be an empty string, and just use like() instead of is(), saving this if/else. > But especially the omission of command_fails_like() in PostgresNode.pm feels > like an bug. +=item $node->command_fails_like(...) - TestLib::command_fails_like with our PGPORT + +See command_ok(...) + +=cut + +sub command_fails_like +{ + my $self = shift; + + local $ENV{PGPORT} = $self->port; + + TestLib::command_fails_like(@_); +} Most likely a case where this is needed has not showed up, so +1 to remove this inconsistency across the modules. -- Michael
On 2017-03-23 03:28, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:51 AM, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl> wrote: >> While trying to test pgbench's stderr (looking for 'creating tables' >> in >> output of the initialisation step) I ran into these two bugs (or >> perhaps >> better 'oversights'). > > + if (defined $expected_stderr) { > + like($stderr, $expected_stderr, "$test_name: stderr matches"); > + } > + else { > is($stderr, '', "$test_name: no stderr"); > - like($stdout, $expected_stdout, "$test_name: matches"); > + } > To simplify that you could as well set expected_output to be an empty > string, and just use like() instead of is(), saving this if/else. (I'll assume you meant '$expected_stderr' (not 'expected_output')) That would be nice but with that, other tests start complaining: "doesn't look like a regex to me" To avoid that, I uglified your version back to: + like($stderr, (defined $expected_stderr ? $expected_stderr : qr{}), + "$test_name: stderr matches"); I did it like that in the attached patch (0001-testlib-like-stderr.diff). The other (PostgresNode.pm.diff) is unchanged. make check-world without error. Thanks, Erik Rijkers -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Вложения
On 3/22/17 11:51, Erik Rijkers wrote: > While trying to test pgbench's stderr (looking for 'creating tables' in > output of the initialisation step) I ran into these two bugs (or > perhaps better 'oversights'). Perhaps pgbench should be printing progress messages to stdout instead? > But especially the omission of command_fails_like() in PostgresNode.pm > feels like an bug. Yeah, that's just because no one has needed it yet. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services