Re: tuplesort.c's copytup_index() is dead code

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tuplesort.c's copytup_index() is dead code
Date: 2016-06-24 04:10:29
Message-ID: CAM3SWZSbJNraCkPNsv_Uh69Ja+DK7xP11DHZEf3RjLgJ12K1KA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> We *do* have regression test coverage, but that code is set up to not
> kick in at any index scale that would be sane to test in the regression
> tests. See
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/12194.1466724741@sss.pgh.pa.us

I'm well aware of that issue. This is the same reason why we don't
have any regression test coverage of external sorts. I don't think
that that's good enough.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2016-06-24 04:28:22 Re: initdb issue on 64-bit Windows - (Was: [pgsql-packagers] PG 9.6beta2 tarballs are ready)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-06-24 03:35:22 Re: tuplesort.c's copytup_index() is dead code