Re: "Some tests to cover hash_index"

From: Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: "Some tests to cover hash_index"
Date: 2016-09-19 15:14:37
Message-ID: CAD__Oui56zrYz53ruS5TQSV8M=-yEiYZunqyHfUxRE7eGR3HhQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I wonder why you have included a new file for these tests, why can't be
these added to existing hash_index.sql.
tests in hash_index.sql did not cover overflow pages, above tests were for
mainly for them. So I thought having a separate test file can help
enabling/disabling them in schedule files, when we do not want them running
as it take slightly high time. If you think otherwise I will reconsider
will add tests to hash_index.sql.

>The relation name con_hash_index* choosen in above tests doesn't seem to
be appropriate, how about hash_split_heap* or something like that.
Fixed. Have renamed relation, index and test filename accordingly.

--
Thanks and Regards
Mithun C Y
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
commit-hash_coverage_test_v2_no_wal.patch application/octet-stream 7.4 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kenneth Marshall 2016-09-19 15:16:21 Re: Hash Indexes
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-09-19 12:58:35 Re: PATCH: Keep one postmaster monitoring pipe per process