From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:43:38 +0900
Message-ID: <20190118004338.GC1883@paquier.xyz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21538.1547770868@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <9427.1547701450@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<alpine.DEB.2.21.1901170659210.7416@lancre>
<21538.1547770868@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 07:21:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Sorry, I don't buy this line of argument. Reasonable test design requires
> making cost/benefit tradeoffs: the cost to run the test over and over,
> and the cost to maintain the test itself (e.g. fix portability issues in
> it) have to be balanced against the probability of it finding something
> useful. I judge that the chance of this particular test finding something
> is small, and I've had quite enough of the maintenance costs.
Yes, I agree with Tom's line of thoughts here. It seems to me that
just dropping this part of the test is just but fine.
--
Michael
Attachments:
[application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (832B, ../20190118004338.GC1883@paquier.xyz/2-signature.asc)
download
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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: michael@paquier.xyz, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, coelho@cri.ensmp.fr, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD
In-Reply-To: <20190118004338.GC1883@paquier.xyz>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox