| From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding facility for injection points (or probe points?) for more advanced tests |
| Date: | 2024-01-05 07:25:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAExHW5tnSYzS3R-YNm8N_z0mw9Bt8x1oEe_fCG88cx6qiKv_2A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 12:49 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> I mean why? We test a bunch of stuff in src/test/modules/, and this
> is not intended to be released to the outside world.
>
> Putting that in contrib/ has a lot of extra cost. One is
> documentation and more complexity regarding versioning when it comes
> to upgrading it to a new version. I don't think that it is a good
> idea to deal with this extra load of work for something that I'd aim
> to be used for having improved *test* coverage, and the build switch
> should stay. Saying that, I'd be OK with renaming the module to
> injection_points,
Ok. Thanks.
> but I will fight hard about keeping that in
> src/test/modules/. That's less maintenance headache to think about
> when having to deal with complex racy bugs.
For me getting this feature in code in a usable manner is more
important than its place in the code. I have no plans to fight over
it. :).
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2024-01-05 07:39:39 | Re: verify predefined LWLocks have entries in wait_event_names.txt |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2024-01-05 07:19:20 | Re: [17] CREATE SUBSCRIPTION ... SERVER |