| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com>, David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG] pg_stat_statements and extended query protocol |
| Date: | 2023-03-23 09:21:21 |
| Message-ID: | ZBwaEbdpVYJPXjT5@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 09:33:16AM +0100, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> Thanks! LGTM and also do confirm that, with the patch, the JDBC test
> does show the correct results.
How does JDBC test that? Does it have a dependency on
pg_stat_statements?
>
> That said, not having a test (for the reasons you explained
> up-thread) associated with the patch worry me a bit.
Same impression here.
> But, I'm tempted to say that adding new tests could be addressed
> separately though (as this patch looks pretty straightforward).
Even small patches can have gotchas. I think that this should have
tests in-core rather than just depend on JDBC and hope for the best.
Even if \bind does not allow that, we could use an approach similar to
libpq_pipeline, for example, depending on pg_stat_statements for the
validation with a test module in src/test/modules/?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2023-03-23 09:21:47 | Re: add log messages when replication slots become active and inactive (was Re: Is it worth adding ReplicationSlot active_pid to ReplicationSlotPersistentData?) |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2023-03-23 09:18:35 | Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age? |