Re: [HACKERS] taking stdbool.h into use

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] taking stdbool.h into use
Date: 2018-01-24 06:44:04
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:33:56AM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Here is a proposed patch set to clean this up. First, add some test
> coverage for record_image_cmp. (There wasn't any, only for
> record_image_eq as part of MV testing.) Then, remove the GET_ macros
> from record_image_{eq,cmp}. And finally remove all that byte-masking
> stuff from postgres.h.

Good catch. Coverage reports mark those areas as empty! Similarly the
functions for record_* are mostly not used. Some tests could be added
for them at the same time. The four error paths of those functions are
tested as well, which is cool to see. Even if the buildfarm explodes
after 0002 and 0003, 0001 is still a good addition. The set looks good
to me by the way.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Catalin Iacob 2018-01-24 06:46:41 Re: Doc tweak for huge_pages?
Previous Message Andrey Borodin 2018-01-24 06:34:18 Re: Index-only scan returns incorrect results when using a composite GIST index with a gist_trgm_ops column.