On 2023-05-16 02:19, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 11:23:18PM +0300, Marina Polyakova wrote:
>> 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
It confuses me a little that different methods are used for the same
purpose. But the namespace test checks schemas. So see
diff_abc_to_txn_table.patch which replaces abc with txn_table in the
transaction test.
--
Marina Polyakova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company