| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |
| Date: | 2020-10-22 14:28:24 |
| Message-ID: | 276292.1603376904@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> The messages in the log aren't very
> illuminating, unfortunately. :-(
Considering this is a TAP test, why in the world is it designed to hide
all details of any unexpected amcheck messages? Surely being able to
see what amcheck is saying would be helpful here.
IOW, don't have the tests abbreviate the module output with count(*),
but return the full thing, and then use a regex to see if you got what
was expected. If you didn't, the output will show what you did get.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2020-10-22 14:46:51 | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-10-22 14:25:48 | Re: partition routing layering in nodeModifyTable.c |