Re: Writing new unit tests with PostgresNode

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Writing new unit tests with PostgresNode
Date: 2016-02-22 15:29:33
Message-ID: 20160222152933.GA170977@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Craig Ringer wrote:

> > +=pod
> > +
> > +=head2 Set up a node
> > pod format... Do we really want that? Considering that those modules
> > are only aimed at being dedicated for in-core testing, I would say no.
>
> If it's plain comments you have to scan through massive piles of verbose
> Perl to find what you want. If it's pod you can just perldoc
> /path/to/module it and get a nice summary of the functions etc.
>
> If these are intended to become usable facilities for people to write tests
> with then I think it's important that the docs be reasonably accessible.

Yes, I think adding POD here is a good idea. I considered doing it
myself back when I was messing with PostgresNode ...

--
Álvaro Herrera 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 Oleksii Kliukin 2016-02-22 15:39:57 Re: WIP: Failover Slots
Previous Message Daniel Verite 2016-02-22 15:08:23 Re: psql metaqueries with \gexec