| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Enabling Checksums |
| Date: | 2012-12-05 23:40:47 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmobb9ynO+7DfPp3qVogS9eSrPGBWHtcwjpibSd2K261Abw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> Or, I could write up a test framework in ruby or python, using the
> appropriate pg driver, and some not-so-portable shell commands to start
> and stop the server. Then, I can publish that on this list, and that
> would at least make it easier to test semi-manually and give greater
> confidence in pre-commit revisions.
That latter approach is similar to what happened with SSI's isolation
tester. It started out in Python, and then Heikki rewrote it in C.
If Python/Ruby code is massively simpler to write than the C code,
that might be a good way to start out. It'll be an aid to reviewers
even if neither it nor any descendent gets committed.
Frankly, I think some automated testing harness (written in C or Perl)
that could do fault-injection tests as part of the buildfarm would be
amazingly awesome. I'm drooling just thinking about it. But I guess
that's getting ahead of myself.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-12-05 23:41:10 | Re: ALTER TABLE ... NOREWRITE option |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2012-12-05 23:37:23 | Functional dependency in GROUP BY through JOINs |