From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Evgeniy Gorbanev <gorbanyoves(at)basealt(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: No error checking when reading from file using zstd in pg_dump |
Date: | 2025-07-01 15:18:41 |
Message-ID: | 43620562-DAC6-4AA3-BBF2-524069A41037@yesql.se |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 1 Jul 2025, at 17:11, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> wrote:
> On 7/1/25 16:24, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> This version has been tested against v17 and v16 where it applies and passes
>> all tests (the latter isn't as assuring as it should be since there is a lack
>> of testcoverage).
>
> Could you elaborate what you mean by lack of test coverage? Doesn't
> pg_dump have TAP tests exercising all compression methods? Perhaps it
> does not exercise all parts of the code, and we could improve that?
Sorry, I was unclear. There are indeed lots of pg_dump tests and all
compression methods are tested (the 0% for Zstd on coverage.pg.org is due to
that instance not being compiled with zstd support) but there are functions
which evade testing like getc_func. It's also quite hard to test all the error
paths as that would require some sort of fault injection.
I don't think the current coverage is cause for holding back this patch, but
there is room for improvement to made in the coming cycle.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sami Imseih | 2025-07-01 15:29:28 | Re: pg_get_multixact_members not documented |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2025-07-01 15:11:55 | Re: No error checking when reading from file using zstd in pg_dump |