| From: | Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: postgres_fdw: Add more test coverage for EvalPlanQual testing |
| Date: | 2025-11-06 03:39:05 |
| Message-ID: | CAPmGK16ghshhbM4mF1_+O2nUbKTgoJ0XD4+F-eyhep4Gk=J2FA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 8:18 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> In [1] it was pointed out that there is no test coverage for
> postgresRecheckForeignScan. So I would like to propose to add test
> cases to cover that function (and related core functions like
> ForeignRecheck), as promised in that thread. Please find attached a
> patch. (Note that commit 12609fbac, which fixes an EPQ issue reported
> in [1], added a test case for ExecScanFetch(), but didn't add any test
> cases for that function.)
>
> In the patch I modified all permutations, including existing one, to
> use per-session setup doing "BEGIN ISOLATION LEVEL READ COMMITTED",
> for simplicity, and modified existing step names/comments a little bit
> to match new ones, for consistency.
>
> Like commit 12609fbac, I would also like to propose to back-patch this
> to all supported versions.
There seemed to be no objections, so pushed and back-patched.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2025-11-06 03:41:09 | Re: Obsolete comment in ExecScanReScan() |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2025-11-06 03:35:43 | Re: Teaching planner to short-circuit empty UNION/EXCEPT/INTERSECT inputs |