Re: [sferac@bo.nettuno.it: Re: [HACKERS] BUG: NOT boolfield kills backend]

> Hi,
>
> sorry for interference,
> this is a very good topic for discussing and in spite of some stress
> it indicates Postgres are really coming into production and most
> important question becomes a stability.
>
> On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, Christopher Oliver wrote:
>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 01:34:08 -0400
> > From: Christopher Oliver <oliver(at)fritz(dot)traverse(dot)net>
> > To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
> > Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> > Subject: Re: [sferac(at)bo(dot)nettuno(dot)it: Re: [HACKERS] BUG: NOT boolfield kills backend]
> >
> > > OK, what do you suggest we do?
> >
> > What I'm basically suggesting is to increase the stringency of the
> > regression suite. Several posters supported my idea of keeping crash-
> > ing tests around. I think they should stick around indefinitely.
> > I.e. 6.4 BETA1 has some pointer errors that turn up as crashes in the
> > query optimizer. They seem to be of the form CLAUSE AND (CLAUSE OR
> > CLAUSE) or the same with the disjunction and conjunction reversed.
> > This sort of construct or the crashing negation construct someone
> > complained of earlier are likely to arise in real life. It's not
> > unreasonable therefore that tests for such patterns be added to the
> > regression suite. I.e. we collect the past queries from the real
> > world that crash our system with a mind to validate the software
>
> I'm using postgres in commecrcial applications since beginning of 1995 and
> certainly without home-made test-suite I couldn't do that.
> And I put new version into production only if my test-sute passes
> for me on specific machine and works at least month.
> Sometimes it works but I didnt' satisfied by speed and I'm looking
> for workaround ( robust workaround ). I would be happy if someone
> could works on general test suite which cover my specific data,
> operational system and environment and I would prefer to run regression tests
> for a 30 minutes, one hour or more if it would guarantee my applications will
> run ok, but I understand how different may be data, OSes and especially
> appl. environment. i.e. fast developing Linux, compilers, locale, libc etc...
>

This may sound obvious, but isn't that what we are doing in the beta
test cycle. Everyone is testing their applications/platforms, and
reporting problems back to us.

I don't see how we can ever duplicate all the tests everyone runs with
their applications. I suppose it is possible, but as applications
change to use new features, we would still be running the old
application tests.

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
http://www.op.net/~candle | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 853-3000(h)
+ Christ can be your backup. |