From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification |
Date: | 2017-11-29 06:03:21 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTrm4gChe-OmQ_JSd5-n95hM_ONZv+rZOrm0MvoR=B-eg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> My understanding of your earlier remarks, rightly or wrongly, was that
> you wanted me to adopt the Bloom filter to actually be usable from SQL
> in some kind of general way. As opposed to what I just said -- adding
> a stub SQL interface that simply invokes the test harness, with all
> the heavy lifting taking place in C code.
>
> Obviously these are two very different things. I'm quite happy to add
> the test harness.
Quote from this email:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqSUKppzvNSHY1OM_TdSj0UE18xNFCrOwPC3E8svq7Mb_Q%40mail.gmail.com
> One first thing striking me is that there is no test for this
> implementation, which would be a base stone for other things, it would
> be nice to validate that things are working properly before moving on
> with 0002, and 0001 is a feature on its own. I don't think that it
> would be complicated to have a small module in src/test/modules which
> plugs in a couple of SQL functions on top of bloomfilter.h.
My apologies if this sounded like having a set of SQL functions in
core, I meant a test suite from the beginning with an extension
creating the interface or such.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-11-29 07:58:25 | TupleDescCopy doesn't clear atthasdef, attnotnull, attidentity |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-11-29 05:54:39 | Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification |