| From: | "Jonathan Gonzalez V(dot)" <jonathan(dot)abdiel(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)tigerdata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, solai v <solai(dot)cdac(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Cover get_json_table_plan() with tests |
| Date: | 2026-07-22 08:00:08 |
| Message-ID: | 871pcv4fp3.fsf@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello!
>> Could you please clarify which lines of get_json_table_plan() this
>> will cover which are not currently covered by patch v2?
>
> What are the old and new coverage numbers before and after the fact,
> and where are the zones impacted? I am seeing a mention to
> "improvements", but zero fact explaining things. This is mostly to
> get a feeling of the gain vs the runtime involved.
Yes, I'm sorry I forgot to include the numbers and the facts, my bad!
So the v2 to is missing the following lines
12779: castNode(JsonTablePathScan, j->lplan)->child);
12785: castNode(JsonTablePathScan, j->rplan)->child);
Which will be covered by my suggestion, these are marked as not tested
in a 2 branch in the coverage.
The current coverage for the function get_json_table_plan() without the
v2 is:
get_json_table_plan (line 12752) called 3 times, returned 3 times 54.0%
With the v2:
get_json_table_plan (line 12752) called 11 times, returned 11 times 95.0%
Applying my suggestion
get_json_table_plan (line 12752) called 38 times, returned 38 times 100.0%
Those are the full numbers for that function.
Regards!
--
Jonathan Gonzalez V.
EDB
https://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Anthonin Bonnefoy | 2026-07-22 08:16:53 | Don't use pq_putmessage in socket comm function |
| Previous Message | Tender Wang | 2026-07-22 07:44:51 | Re: remove_useless_joins vs. bug #19560 |