| From: | Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: OOM in libpq and infinite loop with getCopyStart() |
| Date: | 2016-03-03 13:18:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20160303161859.42f977f8@fujitsu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, Michael
I didn't checked your patch in detail yet but here is a thought I would
like to share.
In my experience usually it takes number of rewrites before patch will
be accepted. To make sure that after every rewrite your patch still
solves an issue you described you should probably provide a few test
programs too. If it's possible to make these programs part of regression
tests suite it would be just great.
Without such test programs I personally find it difficult to verify
that your patch fixes something. If such examples are provided your
patch would be much more likely to accepted. "See, this program crashes
everything. Now we apply a patch and everything works! Cool, heh?"
Best regards,
Aleksander
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2016-03-03 13:27:42 | Re: TAP / recovery-test fs-level backups, psql enhancements etc |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-03-03 13:16:47 | Re: TAP / recovery-test fs-level backups, psql enhancements etc |