Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Clément Prévost <prevostclement(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered
Date: 2016-08-02 17:17:27
Message-ID: 194d6594-40da-7202-ff94-9003138c54e1@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 6/19/16 10:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Independent of that, it would help testing things like this if we allowed
>> > setting max_worker_processes to 0, instead of the current minimum 1. If
>> > there a reason for the minimum of 1?
> I believe that's pure brain fade on my part. I think the minimum should be 0.

Fixed.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Harvey 2016-08-02 17:18:16 Re: MSVC pl-perl error message is not verbose enough
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2016-08-02 16:51:16 Re: pg_size_pretty, SHOW, and spaces