| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pgbench "progress" test pending solution of its timing is (fwd) |
| Date: | 2020-03-27 22:32:55 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.21.2003272226170.16227@pseudo |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> This patch is registered in 2020-01, but the last message in the thread
>> seems to be from 2019/05/23. The patch itself seems to be OK (it applies
>> fine etc.) What do we need to get it over the line, instead of just
>> moving it to the next one CF over and over?
>
> It does not look like the remainder of this patch is going to be committed
> and I don't think it makes sense to keep moving the patch indefinitely.
>
> Unless something changes by the end of this CF I'll mark it Returned With
> Feedback.
I'd be rather unclear about what the actual feedback is, though. I'd
interpret it as "pg does not care much about code coverage". Most clients
are in the red on coverage.postgresql.org. I'd like pgbench at least to be
in the green, but it does not look that it will ever be the case.
--
Fabien.p
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Steele | 2020-03-27 22:33:51 | Re: backup manifests |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-03-27 22:27:32 | Re: Conflict handling for COPY FROM |