| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only) |
| Date: | 2016-07-02 10:27:16 |
| Message-ID: | 43b82d9a-b74c-6556-5e5d-0bf72a5c745e@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/2/16 12:40 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> We should be more ambitious about adding test coverage to tuplesort.c.
IMHO, s/ to tuplesort.c//, at least for the buildfarm.
TAP tests don't run by default, so maybe that's the place to start
"going crazy" with adding more testing. Though I do think something
that's sorely needed is the ability to test stuff at the C level.
Sometimes SQL is jut too high a level to verify things.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christoph Berg | 2016-07-02 11:51:42 | Re: Broken handling of lwlocknames.h |
| Previous Message | Victor Giannakouris - Salalidis | 2016-07-02 07:35:08 | Statistics Injection |