On 2016-01-22 08:40:28 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote: > Ideally reviewers shouldn't be doing any testing, because the tests > that are part of the patch should answer every question they would > have, but I don't see that happening until we have a separate > automation-only target that we don't care how long it takes to run.
I think that's completely wrong. Yes, more tests are good, and we need a place for longer running tests. But assuming that every patch author will create a testsuite that covers every angle is just about akin to assuming every submitter will deliver perfect, bug free code. And we know how well that turns out. I think actively trying to break a feature, and postgres in general, is one of the most important tasks of reviewers and testers. And with that I don't mean trying to run "make check". Look e.g. at the tests Jeff Janes has performed, what the recent plug tests of Tomas Vondra brought to light, or at what the full page write checker tool of Heikki's showed. Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers