Re: coverage analysis improvements

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: coverage analysis improvements
Date: 2017-09-20 16:48:59
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8/24/17 04:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Patch 0001 removes the .gcov files, which offer a text representation
> of the coverage. Sometimes I use that with a terminal... Not sure for
> the others, but that's my status on the matter. This also removes the
> target coverage. Please note that on some distributions, like, err...
> ArchLinux, lcov is not packaged in the core packages and it is
> necessary to make use of external sources (AUR). It would be nice to
> keep the original gcov calls as well, and keep the split between
> coverage-html and coverage. I think as well that html generate should
> be done only if lcov is found, and that text generation should be done
> only if gcov is used. It is annoying to see --enable-coverage fail
> because lcov only is missing, but it is not mandatory for coverage.

OK, I was not aware that people are using it that way. So updated patch
set there, which separates coverage and coverage-html into two
independent targets.

Peter Eisentraut
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
v3-0001-Run-only-top-level-recursive-lcov.patch text/plain 3.8 KB
v3-0002-Have-lcov-exclude-external-files.patch text/plain 877 bytes
v3-0003-Add-lcov-initial.patch text/plain 2.8 KB
v3-0004-Add-PostgreSQL-version-to-coverage-output.patch text/plain 1.1 KB
v3-0005-Remove-coverage-details-view.patch text/plain 824 bytes
v3-0006-Run-coverage-commands-quietly.patch text/plain 1.0 KB
v3-0007-Improve-vpath-support-in-plperl-build.patch text/plain 1.4 KB
v3-0008-Support-coverage-on-vpath-builds.patch text/plain 1.3 KB
v3-0009-Exclude-flex-generated-code-from-coverage-testing.patch text/plain 7.7 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Kohn 2017-09-20 17:02:07 Re: Varying results when using merge joins over postgres_fdw vs hash joins
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2017-09-20 16:42:05 Re: Varying results when using merge joins over postgres_fdw vs hash joins