Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c is not marked as test covered

> > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 12:53:13PM +, Clément Prévost wrote: > > After some experiments, I found out that, for my setup (9b7bfc3a88ef7b), > a > > parallel seq scan is used given both parallel_setup_cost > > and parallel_tuple_cost are set to 0 and given tha

Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c is not marked as test covered

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:50 PM Andres Freund wrote: > I think it's a good idea to run a force-parallel run on some buildfarm > members. But I'm rather convinced that the core tests run by all animals > need some minimal coverage of parallel queries. Both because otherwise >

[HACKERS] parallel.c is not marked as test covered

The entire parallel.c reported test coverage is zero: http://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/access/transam/parallel.c.gcov.html It seem that it's not covered by the original 924bcf4f commit but I don't know if it's on purpose. This feature being really new that would be understandable. If