From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Add ANALYZE into regression tests |
Date: | 2014-04-14 00:41:15 |
Message-ID: | 20140414004115.GP2556@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Greg,
* Greg Stark (stark(at)mit(dot)edu) wrote:
> But the original goal seems like it would be easier and better done with an
> immutable function which lies and calls elog to leak information. That's
> the actual attack this is supposed to protect against anyways.
Uh, yes, that's what the explain is about- making sure that the 'snoop'
function in the regression test doesn't get pushed down. It *also*
runs the function which raises a notice for each item the function can
see, and verifies that only those values are returned..
> That would make the tests more robust against other changes causing
> failures. Even things like changing explain output formatting for example.
Sure, but there's a whole slew of tests that would have to change if we
changed the explain output, not just this one. I don't think we really
want to make a policy against doing EXPLAIN in regression tests, but if
so, we'd need to go change quite a few tests which have been working
pretty well to date..
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-04-14 03:28:22 | Re: pgsql: Add ANALYZE into regression tests |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2014-04-13 20:24:55 | Re: pgsql: Add ANALYZE into regression tests |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-04-14 01:15:42 | Re: integrate pg_upgrade analyze_new_cluster.sh into vacuumdb |
Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2014-04-13 21:46:20 | Re: Problem with txid_snapshot_in/out() functionality |