| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: psql - improve test coverage from 41% to 88% |
| Date: | 2019-09-12 15:14:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20190912151416.GA23601@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I think the TestLib.pm changes should be done separately, not together
with the rest of the hacking in this patch.
Mostly, because I think they're going to cause trouble. Adding a
parameter in the middle of the list may cause trouble for third-party
users of TestLib. I propose that we make the routines a bit smarter to
cope with the API change: use named parameters instead. And in order to
do that without having to change existing users of command_check, make
it so that the routine checks whether the parameter is a hashref, and
behave differently. So when called as in the existing callsites (five
scalar paramters) it behaves as currently.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-09-12 15:19:50 | Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-09-12 15:08:28 | Re: (Re)building index using itself or another index of the same table |