Re: tests against running server occasionally fail, postgres_fdw & tenk1

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <fujii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tests against running server occasionally fail, postgres_fdw & tenk1
Date: 2023-02-26 21:03:13
Message-ID: 44110.1677445393@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> I'm inclined to think we should indeed just nuke that test. It's
> overcomplicated and it expends a lot of test cycles on a pretty
> marginal feature.

Perhaps a better idea: at the start of the test, set
postgres_fdw.application_name to something that exercises all the
available escape sequences, but don't try to verify what the
result looks like. That at least gives us code coverage for the
escape sequence processing code, even if it doesn't prove that
the output is desirable.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2023-02-26 21:09:38 Re: tests against running server occasionally fail, postgres_fdw & tenk1
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2023-02-26 21:02:38 Re: WIN32 pg_import_system_collations