Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gkIGD-0000Pj-A8 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:43:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gkIGC-0002Lr-3x for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:43:48 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gkIGB-0002Lk-T2 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:43:47 +0000 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gkIG9-0006Ti-Vz for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:43:47 +0000 Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E8E128A64; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 19:43:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 17 Jan 2019 19:43:44 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paquier.xyz; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm3; bh=qekia1RsWqeUZhpy2gkzgfQB4hi Q9wLYbNJiEds5Ljs=; b=DNgm2W0EVFTYoM08muvroYSRZdCo4DlplPl1S/zPkrB ZC8MVPWma9LImWr/SZqxh0uh1eWexp2ssyluHhmuVpk6Dmx0Wde/Iq0IWyel5HVl wWw3rY1PvJLYm0yIDYDdkT/yjjAh4qPbiZ8f5F2Jyg0QsAT3HDk8JlNtV+Nyc7GF sGQGpR7muZ9sd96cney3Y5RpRt0m3Nnh3TyWvzq0DCC/EDm7bAx7uoJ3Fx+fNrfa Se5ZQW19B1kNbwEKJFkJ1dX4XLkQIsdQK66Q75Ci6OAfKalCSdTTjfXM3N9YtD99 VKimf0CdZFpkl3cRx4OdxnZgtCMDbehjYlLLMtJxY3Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=qekia1 RsWqeUZhpy2gkzgfQB4hiQ9wLYbNJiEds5Ljs=; b=Eqykbl1B4YyYciYG2n4t+F vlo0gPOnwMj9Kslnd09vuHveRxWVXUhSefkhcXGr864S24mJ6eyJvJQw4IZZv1G0 o9JQVusPBXRWtnVd3BwumhWJcyYHuQMUIYfuYuzqLMER0BjdgbWnURL3569IPGHl cgJ/7kbvh0XAPt8+lazi13B9vS1cVeOA2tVZgRHXlvYqjaK6Df+ty2Fm6IIZy8z1 QVkRAiBn8QpyhNbHAf1B/6bG5HBY5yrofc6ShXctf1PbmEmIDkQeSFVUD1fZKtVp 6VQh/9g1Ae47T35FCwOvQip6W519KY+msHFI+8AiMGBOxtt0ySwjvwJkgM0atyXA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrgeelgddvfecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfhuthenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedt tdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnegfrhhlucfvnfffucdljedtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesghdtreertddtvdenucfhrhhomhepofhitghh rggvlhcurfgrqhhuihgvrhcuoehmihgthhgrvghlsehprghquhhivghrrdighiiiqeenuc fkphepiedurddvudehrddufeejrdduiedvnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehm ihgthhgrvghlsehprghquhhivghrrdighiiinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from paquier.xyz (c137162.net61215.cablenet.ne.jp [61.215.137.162]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C80FD100BA; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 19:43:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 09:43:38 +0900 From: Michael Paquier To: Tom Lane Cc: Fabien COELHO , PostgreSQL Developers Subject: Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD Message-ID: <20190118004338.GC1883@paquier.xyz> References: <9427.1547701450@sss.pgh.pa.us> <21538.1547770868@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DSayHWYpDlRfCAAQ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <21538.1547770868@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --DSayHWYpDlRfCAAQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline 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 --DSayHWYpDlRfCAAQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEG72nH6vTowiyblFKnvQgOdbyQH0FAlxBIToACgkQnvQgOdby QH3LIBAAgzVLwqriONRCIUpo+k2K2caFgQ3bjWNLK4mYIihfeRyeFwbdQ3+eixw3 /7/0hryaCMPyvscb1Db5NFhSOMCzOudwZHS9IxRc0kY8QdxqBxR8kdm6B84mnCG5 VDqN6+wWy4F+FtnMsAI+P9pcUpZGFOEI1N73xeEKeSY9wRgeeeFTD4H8kK7d48Ch JCIYBx6KtDcBdoyIH1tmFTpcH6G46+/WiHdiz1lb2i+9HGeHOO1OY9gh51OkCgjq cNPwAEo3BQfK76k/BFWSw/jipio+UZuW+yzQ7cGzbvrF5nAGTQ730W/IvC1f9avc 5ZDl160ZYoU+F5W1KpNvEZ43U/we2Vnucc10TRd3XYSsNDGXEDvN7vla7xvwGs74 g1yw/qLQCFZXhZVzhJFoi8+st4hbJLQfQJbhH0UMuphMkqNXzhYByzrLoaAib42s hOW7z4Hhnxoy6oQkehkSvmICaNRcmhvjLoiUXfVgUYXaHwxXSsRmoKLrRIndkqel GRg5wg21SXmIdsNWjFI/8XcBsXnRMNzAWogbQF/1yF1MFLbQKog7YqIPINXtiMJK rTCPJonB7nsxwr1Boa+jv0Fp+N2jN2sRXdTFIRXyYsQfiwsc1sWwxWyL4Y9tGZyW dVnPrjx3IIrOabhdJwyVeUJjGxzeWeCCvogSwuvQq7nrOa3TYYw= =DaQv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --DSayHWYpDlRfCAAQ--