Fujii-san, Kuroda-san, Thank you both for reviewing the patch.
> Testing both forms with the same input and expected output seems a bit > overkill for this fix, since both set the same flag. Isn't testing just > one of them be sufficient? > I feel it's enough to call command_checks_all() once, thought? Agreed. In v2, I kept only the -q test, so command_checks_all() is called once. > Isn't this primarily adding test coverage for existing quiet-mode behavior, > rather than testing the bug being fixed? If so, it might be better to leave > this out of the bug-fix patch intended for backpatching. Thought? Agreed. I removed the truncated-file test. > It might be matter of taste, but how about moving printf() after the > `if (opt->quiet)`? The code might be clearer. I moved the limit-block printf() after the quiet check. > Also, this fix should be backpatched to v17, where pg_walsummary was > introduced? Agreed. I tested the updated patch against REL_17_STABLE and REL_18_STABLE, and the pg_walsummary test suite passes on both. The patch applies cleanly to REL_18_STABLE. On REL_17_STABLE, the code change applies cleanly, but the test needs a small context adjustment because that branch does not contain the pg_stat_io check. Regards, Koshi Shibagaki FUJITSU LIMITED https://www.fujitsu.com/
v2-0001-pg_walsummary-quiet.patch
Description: v2-0001-pg_walsummary-quiet.patch
