Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered

From: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Clément Prévost <prevostclement(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered
Date: 2016-05-09 02:17:48
Message-ID: CAKJS1f8XBC1Qy2rguCZ3f1RG12y4s6sgjuhFWA08uFTNQJEN4g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 9 May 2016 at 13:20, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> David Rowley wrote:
>
>> I'm not entirely sure which machine generates that coverage output,
>> but the problem with it is that it's just one machine. We do have at
>> least one buildfarm member which runs with force_parallel_mode =
>> regress.
>
> It's not a buildfarm machine, but a machine setup specifically for
> coverage reports. It runs "make check-world" only. I can add some
> additional command(s) to run, if somebody can suggest something.

I'm not familiar with what's possible with make check-world, but would
it be reasonable to make that just do another regression test run with
force_parallel_mode set to regress?

--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2016-05-09 02:25:48 Re: First-draft release notes for next week's back-branch releases
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2016-05-09 01:27:53 Re: Stopping logical replication protocol