On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> I don't think that's sufficient. make, and especially check-world,
> should have a decent coverage of the code locally. Without having to
> know about options like force_parallel_mode=regress. As e.g. evidenced
> by the fact that Thomas's latest version crashed if you ran the tests
> that way.  If there's a few lines that aren't covered by the plain
> tests, and more than a few node + parallelism combinations, I'm not
> bothered much. But this is (soon hopefully was) a fairly complicated
> piece of infrastructure - that should be exercised.  If necessary that
> can just be a BEGIN; SET LOCAL force_parallel_mode=on; query with
> blessed descs;COMMIT or whatnot - it's not like we need something hugely
> complicated here.

Yeah, we've been bitten before by changes that seemed OK when run
without force_parallel_mode but misbehaved with that option, so it
would be nice to improve things.  Now, I'm not totally convinced that
just adding a test around blessed tupledescs is really going to help
very much - that option exercises a lot of code, and this is only one
relatively small bit of it.  But I'm certainly not objecting to the

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to