On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 1:35 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> Are you sure that relying on Temp::File is a good thing overall? The
> current temporary file knowledge is encapsulated within Utils.pm, with
> files removed or kept depending on PG_TEST_NOCLEAN. So it would be
> just more consistent to rely on the existing facilities instead?
> test_json_parser is the only code path in the whole tree that directly
> uses File::Temp. The rest of the TAP tests relies on Utils.pm for
> temp file paths.
Yeah, I think this patch invented a new solution to a problem that
we've solved in a different way everywhere else. I think we should
change it to match what we do in general.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com