Re: [PATCH] Covering SPGiST index

Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> In a v14 I forgot to add the test. PFA v15

I've committed this with a lot of mostly-cosmetic changes.
The not-so-cosmetic bits had to do with confusion between
the input data type and the leaf type, which isn't really
your fault because it was there before :-(.

One note is that I dropped the added regression test script
(index_including_spgist.sql) entirely, because I couldn't
see that it did anything that justified a permanent expenditure
of test cycles. It looks like you made that by doing s/gist/spgist/g
on index_including_gist.sql, which might be all right except that
that script was designed to test GiST-specific implementation concerns
that aren't too relevant to SP-GiST. AFAICT, removing that script had
exactly zero effect on the test coverage shown by gcov. There are
certainly bits of spgist that are depressingly under-covered, but I'm
afraid we need custom-designed test cases to get at them.

(wanders away wondering if the isolationtester could be used to test
the concurrency-sensitive parts of spgvacuum.c ...)

regards, tom lane