From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Ian Barwick <ian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Testing DDL deparsing support |
Date: | 2014-12-05 12:29:59 |
Message-ID: | 20141205122959.GD1768@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:43:36PM +0900, Ian Barwick wrote:
> > Standard regression tests are helpful because patch authors include new test
> > cases in the patches that stress their new options or commands. This new test
> > framework needs to be something that internally runs the regression tests and
> > exercises DDL deparsing as the regression tests execute DDL. That would mean
> > that new commands and options would automatically be deparse-tested by our new
> > framework as soon as patch authors add standard regress support.
>
> Are you saying every time a new option is added to a command that a new
> regression test needs to be added?
Not necessarily -- an existing test could be modified, as well.
> We don't normally do that,
I sure hope we do have all options covered by tests.
> and it could easily bloat the regression tests over time.
We had 103 regression tests in 8.2 and we have 145 in 9.4. Does this
qualify as bloat?
> In summary, this testing will help, but it will not be fully reliable.
No testing is ever fully reliable. If it were, there would never be
bugs.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-12-05 12:38:54 | Re: initdb: Improve error recovery. |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-12-05 12:18:05 | Re: Testing DDL deparsing support |