Re: Increasing test coverage of WAL redo functions

Heikki Linnakangas wrote:

> 2. These make the regression database larger. The following tables and
> indexes are added:
>
> postgres=# \d+
> List of relations
> Schema | Name | Type | Owner | Size | Description
> --------+------------------+-------+--------+---------+-------------
> public | btree_tall_tbl | table | heikki | 24 kB |
> public | btree_test_tbl | table | heikki | 392 kB |
> public | gin_test_tbl | table | heikki | 588 MB |
> public | gist_point_tbl | table | heikki | 1056 kB |
> public | spgist_point_tbl | table | heikki | 1056 kB |
> public | spgist_text_tbl | table | heikki | 1472 kB |
> (6 rows)

I think it's good to have these tests, though Tom was complaining
earlier about the size of the regression test database. Would it work
to have this in a separate test suite, like the numeric_big stuff?
We can have it run optionally, and perhaps set up a few buildfarm
members to exercise them on a regular basis.

Also I'm surprised that BRIN did not turn up here. At least the "page
evacuation protocol" to obtain a new revmap page is not exercised by the
current tests. I suppose it's because all WAL records are covered by
other activity, and page evacuation does not emit a specialized WAL
record. If we have the "big" test for this, maybe we can enlarge the
table for the brin index too to ensure we cover this.

BTW looking at the lcov reports the other day I noticed that the lines
PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1 do not get marked as "ran", which decreases the
coverage percentages ... in one of the BRIN files this was quite
noticeable, bringing the function coverage count down to about 50-60%
when it should have been 100%.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services