public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Noah Misch <[email protected]>
To: Stephen Frost <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 21:30:38 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CAB7nPqRdaN1A1YNjxNL9T1jUEWct8ttqq29dNv8W_o37+e8wfA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAB7nPqR9JWCoU8z_CXovL2UkTxahcEx3TzyBYzk3qyXh+MTXMg@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:13:33AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Tom Lane ([email protected]) wrote:
> > Stephen Frost <[email protected]> writes:
> > > I'm all for adding tests into pg_dump which do things like drop columns
> > > and change column names and other cases which could impact if the
> > > pg_dump is correct or not, and there's nothing preventing those tests
> > > from being added in the existing structure.  Certainly, before we remove
> > > the coverage provided by running the serial test suite and then using
> > > pg_upgrade, we should analyze what is being tested and ensure that we're
> > > providing that same set of testing in the pg_dump TAP tests.
> > 
> > I don't think you grasped my basic point, which is that I'm worried about
> > emergent cases that we don't foresee needing to test (and that no amount
> > of code coverage checking would have shown up as being overlooked).
> > Admittedly, relying on the core regression tests to trigger such cases is
> > a pretty haphazard strategy, but it's way better than no strategy at all.
> 
> The tests that were added to the core regression suite were done so for
> a reason and hopefully we can identify cases where it'd make sense to
> also run those tests for pg_upgrade/pg_dump testing.

I think you _are_ missing Tom's point.  We've caught pg_dump and pg_upgrade
bugs thanks to regression database objects created for purposes unrelated to
pg_dump.  It's true that there exist other test strategies that are more
efficient or catch more bugs overall.  None of them substitute 100% for the
serendipity seen in testing dump/restore on the regression database.

> More-or-less
> anything that materially changes the catalog should be included, I would
> think.  Things that are only really only working with the heap/index
> files don't really need to be performed because the pg_upgrade process
> doesn't change those.

That is formally true.


Also, I agree with Andres that this is not a thread for discussing test
changes beyond mechanical translation of the pg_upgrade test suite.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

view thread (113+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox