|From:||David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>|
|To:||Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>|
|Cc:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pgbench "progress" test pending solution of its timing is (fwd)|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 3/28/20 5:27 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> Hello Tom,
> Thanks for your feedback,
>>> I'd be rather unclear about what the actual feedback is, though. I'd
>>> interpret it as "pg does not care much about code coverage". Most
>>> are in the red on coverage.postgresql.org. I'd like pgbench at least
>>> to be
>>> in the green, but it does not look that it will ever be the case.
>> The reason why the first iteration failed was that it was insufficiently
>> insensitive to timing.
This patch has been marked Returned with Feedback.
If the TAP tests could be made to work without the special exceptions
added to pgbench.c I think this patch would have a better chance.
|Next Message||Alexander Korotkov||2020-04-08 12:59:50||Re: Improving connection scalability: GetSnapshotData()|
|Previous Message||Andres Freund||2020-04-08 12:43:18||Re: Improving connection scalability: GetSnapshotData()|