| From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cleanup isolation specs from unused steps |
| Date: | 2019-08-19 17:23:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAAKRu_bpApP_9FQgUeKbuEJBPf8+P1RP=Rx7HjGCcE64T7nx2g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 1:08 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have been looking at the isolation tests, and we have in some specs
> steps which are defined but not used in any permutations. In order to
> detect them, I have been using the attached trick to track which
> permutations are used. This allows to find immediately any
> over-engineered spec by generating diffs about steps defined by not
> used in any permutations. On HEAD, we have six specs entering in this
> category.
>
> Would that be useful?
>
I think it is useful.
could you do the check that all steps have been used in dry_run mode
instead of when running the tests for real?
--
Melanie Plageman
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2019-08-19 18:20:46 | io_uring support |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2019-08-19 15:54:13 | Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS) |