From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table |
Date: | 2017-03-28 08:25:25 |
Message-ID: | 04b2665e-d7a3-0b0d-5d47-c387fa6a5055@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Stephen,
On 2017/03/21 1:40, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Amit,
>
> * Amit Langote (Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp) wrote:
>> On 2017/02/17 22:32, Stephen Frost wrote:
>>> * Amit Langote (Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp) wrote:
>>>> In certain cases, pg_dump's dumpTableSchema() emits a separate ALTER TABLE
>>>> command for those schema elements of a table that could not be included
>>>> directly in the CREATE TABLE command for the table.
>>>
>>> Any chance we could start adding regression tests for how pg_dump
>>> handles partitions? I'm just about to the point where I have pretty
>>> much everything else covered (at least in pg_dump.c, where it's not a
>>> hard-to-reproduce error/exit case, or something version-dependent).
>>>
>>> If you have any questions about how the TAP tests for pg_dump work, or
>>> about how to generate code-coverage checks to make sure you're at least
>>> hitting every line (tho, of course, not every possible path), let me
>>> know. I'd be happy to explain them.
>>
>> Yeah, I guess it would be a good idea to have some pg_dump TAP test
>> coverage for the new partitioning stuff. I will look into that and get
>> back to you if I don't grok something there.
>
> As you may have seen, I've added some tests to the pg_dump TAP tests for
> partitioning to cover lines of code not already covered. There are
> still some bits not covered though, which you can see here:
>
> https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c.gcov.html
>
> If you have any questions about the way the pg_dump tests work, feel
> free to ask.
Sorry that it took me week to thank you for doing this.
Thanks,
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mithun Cy | 2017-03-28 09:00:55 | Re: [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes. |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-03-28 08:11:53 | Re: Feature suggestion: Database-Security-Modules (DSM) |