> Jan, regression is not a test of the level a developer would use to make > sure his code works. It is merely to make sure the install works on a > limited number of cases.
News to me! If anything, I don't think a lot of the current regression tests are comprehensive enough! For the SET/DROP NOT NULL patch I submitted, I included a regression test that tests every one of the preconditions in my code - that way if anything gets changed or broken, we'll find out very quickly. I personally don't have a problem with the time taken to regression test - and I think that trimming the numeric test _might_ be a false economy. Who knows what's going to turn around and bite us oneday? > Having seen zero reports of any numeric > failures since we installed it, and seeing it takes >10x times longer > than the other tests, I think it should be paired back. Do we really > need 10 tests of each complex function? I think one would do the trick. A good point tho, I didn't submit a regression test that tries to ALTER 3 different non-existent tables to check for failures - one test was enough... Chris ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
