| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL www <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: coverage.postgresql.org not being refreshed |
| Date: | 2021-01-24 18:07:10 |
| Message-ID: | 1591717.1611511630@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> Hm, a 0.2% increase ... sounds marginal.
> The other two increases are more interesting, but if the code is already
> covered by ssl/ldap/kerberos, then the checktcp test isn't buying much there
> either.
Since those are all non-default build options, I suppose that the
checktcp target does have some reason to live: it's the only test
suite that will exercise TCP-related code paths in a minimal build.
(On non-Windows platforms, anyway.)
However, if nobody knows about it and no buildfarm animals test it,
that argument seems pretty hypothetical :-(
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2021-01-26 02:54:10 | Re: Code of Conduct plan,Re: Code of Conduct plan,Re: Code of Conduct plan,Re: Code of Conduct plan |
| Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-01-24 17:53:26 | Re: missing ML messages |