Re: PostgreSQL Audit Extension

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Audit Extension
Date: 2016-02-02 03:31:18
Message-ID: 20160202033118.GA4096289@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 09:59:01PM +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Anyway I think the tests here are massive

I would not want to see fewer tests. When I reviewed a previous incarnation
of pgaudit, the tests saved me hours of writing my own.

> and the code is not;

Nah; the patch size category is the same regardless of how you arrange the
tests. The tests constitute less than half of the overall change.

> perhaps people get the mistaken impression
> that this is a huge amount of code which scares them. Perhaps you could
> split it up in (1) code and (2) tests, which wouldn't achieve any
> technical benefit but would offer some psychological comfort to
> potential reviewers. You know it's all psychology in these parts.

That's harmless. If it makes someone feel better, great.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2016-02-02 04:16:16 Re: Raising the checkpoint_timeout limit
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2016-02-02 03:22:57 Re: [PATCH] Phrase search ported to 9.6