| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Subject: | Re: Unit tests for SLRU |
| Date: | 2022-11-11 05:11:08 |
| Message-ID: | Y23ZbI3JEtyVFcHY@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 06:40:44PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> Fair enough. PFA the corrected patch v5.
Is there a reason why you need a TAP test here? It is by design more
expensive than pg_regress and it does not require --enable-tap-tests.
See for example what we do for snapshot_too_old, commit_ts,
worker_spi, etc., where each module uses a custom configuration file.
Hmm. If I were to write that, I think that I would make the SLRU
directory configurable as a PGC_POSTMASTER, at least, for the purpose
of the exercise, and also split test_slru() into more user-callable
functions so as it would be possible to mix more cross-check scenarios
with the low-level C APIs if need be, with adapted input parameters.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2022-11-11 05:17:58 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-11-11 05:09:06 | Re: Typo about subxip in comments |