Alexander Korotkov <a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> writes: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 9:31 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Why is this so bad? It's not like the gist regression test isn't >> ridiculously expensive already; I'd have expected it to provide >> darn near 100% coverage for what it's costing in runtime.
> I don't think there is any idea behind this. Seems to be just oversight. After poking at it a bit, the answer seems to be that the gist buffering code isn't invoked till we get to an index size of effective_cache_size/4, which by default would be way too much for any regression test index. > Do you like me to write a patch improving coverage here? Somebody needs to... that's an awful lot of code to not be testing. regards, tom lane