| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions (checkAsUser) |
| Date: | 2023-02-20 15:40:10 |
| Message-ID: | 3570012.1676907610@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> On 2023-Feb-20, Amit Langote wrote:
>> One more thing we could try is come up with a postgres_fdw test case,
>> because it uses the RelOptInfo.userid value for remote-costs-based
>> path size estimation. But adding a test case to contrib module's
>> suite test a core planner change might seem strange, ;-).
> Maybe. Perhaps adding it in a separate file there is okay?
There is plenty of stuff in contrib module tests that is really
there to test core-code behavior. (You could indeed argue that
*all* of contrib is there for that purpose.) If it's not
convenient to test something without an extension, just do it
and don't sweat about that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-02-20 15:47:13 | Re: pg_crc32c_armv8.c:35:9: error: implicit declaration of function '__crc32cb' is invalid in C99 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-02-20 15:30:43 | Re: "out of relcache_callback_list slots" after multiple calls to pg_logical_slot_get_binary_changes |