Gregory Stark wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I have uploaded an example run here: > > http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/coverage/ > > > > Current test coverage is about 66% overall. > > With some pretty glaring gaps: 0% coverage of geqo, 0% coverage of logtape > which implies no tuplesorts are spilling to disk, no coverage of mark/restore > on index scans...
Yah, that kinda shocked me too. Clearly we should spend some effort to expand the regression tests a bit. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
