Re: [PATCH] Improve code coverage of network address functions

From: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Keisuke Kuroda <keisuke(dot)kuroda(dot)3862(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve code coverage of network address functions
Date: 2025-01-28 10:33:58
Message-ID: CAJ7c6TNTeCAFzsC55gViD68VLci2TQX319ciFHirHG-t_Dh33Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

> The correct version is as follows.
>
> make installcheck-world: tested, passed
> Implements feature: tested, passed
> Spec compliant: tested, passed
> Documentation: tested, passed

Thanks for your feedback!

> About the tests pushed to the SSL test suite, I'm +-0. 003_sslinfo.pl
> is a bit better than the two others in the SSL test suite, still it
> does not really fit into this file.

So to clarify, you propose creating a new file for the test (still in
the ssl/ suite) or keep it as is?

I agree that this is not exactly the best place for the test. However
I'm not sure whether creating a new one, e.g.
ssl/t/004_code_coverage.pl will be much better considering the fact
that the test still has little (nothing) to do with SSL.

Personally I'm fine with either option though.

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vladyslav Nebozhyn 2025-01-28 10:46:50 Feature Request: Add AES-128-CFB Mode Support to pgcrypto
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-01-28 10:31:48 Re: NOT ENFORCED constraint feature