From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: New regression test time |
Date: | 2013-06-28 21:31:06 |
Message-ID: | 20130628213106.GH11516@alap2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-06-28 14:01:23 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Per discussion on these tests, I ran "make check" against 9.4 head,
> applied all of the regression tests other than DISCARD.
>
> Time for 3 "make check" runs without new tests: 65.9s
>
> Time for 3 "make check runs with new tests: 71.7s
>
> So that's an increase of about 10% in test runtime (or 2 seconds per run
> on my laptop), in order to greatly improve regression test coverage.
How did you evaluate that coverage increased "greatly"? I am not
generally against these tests but I'd be surprised if the overall test
coverage improved noticeably by this. Which makes 10% runtime overhead
pretty hefty if the goal is to actually achieve a high coverage.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-06-28 21:46:10 | Re: New regression test time |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-06-28 21:28:49 | Re: Add some regression tests for SEQUENCE |