Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] regression bigtest needs very long time

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: SAKAIDA <sakaida(at)psn(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] regression bigtest needs very long time
Date: 1999-06-26 17:27:59
Message-ID: 26274.930418079@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Just don't run bigtest.  It is only for people who are having trouble
> with the new numeric type.

I don't mind too much that bigtest takes forever --- as you say,
it shouldn't be run except by people who want a thorough test.

But I *am* unhappy that the regular numeric test takes much longer than
all the other regression tests put together.  That's an unreasonable
amount of effort spent on one feature, and it gets really annoying for
someone like me who's in the habit of running the regress tests after
any update.  Is there anything this test is likely to catch that
wouldn't get caught with a much narrower field width (say 10 digits
instead of 30)?

			regards, tom lane

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1999-06-26 18:55:03
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Severe SUBSELECT bug in 6.5 CVS
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 1999-06-26 17:22:50
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Severe SUBSELECT bug in 6.5 CVS

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group