From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@iki.fi>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: tuplesort test coverage
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2019 15:03:23 -0500
Message-ID: <20446.1576353803@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191212232521.ubi2eash4nivbkyf@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20191013144153.ooxrfglvnaocsrx2@alap3.anarazel.de>
<CAH2-WzkC8ZRMXv_cmwHrojyWyu+nLuy=+4aX8GX6PC-WiLQEnQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20191024181034.b44nr5lugqvfcev2@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20191024211027.owa65zwzuqevacbq@alap3.anarazel.de>
<CAH2-Wz=TdYRc4LDi97J5RWXUoi83eNna=9LREgTW5k+XD6=PZA@mail.gmail.com>
<20191114002546.a5fqvdmmkfpbir22@alap3.anarazel.de>
<3244.1576160824@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20191212232521.ubi2eash4nivbkyf@alap3.anarazel.de>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-12-12 09:27:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> What seems like a simpler and more reliable fix is to make
>> test_mark_restore a temp table, thus keeping autovac away from it.
>> Is there a reason in terms of the test's goals not to do that?
> I can't see any reason. The sorting code shouldn't care about the source
> of tuples. I guess there could at some point be tests for parallel
> sorting, but that'd just use a different table.
OK, done that way.
>> Also ... why in the world does the script drop its tables at the end
>> with IF EXISTS? They'd better exist at that point. I object
>> to the DROP IF EXISTS up at the top, too. The regression tests
>> do not need to be designed to deal with an unpredictable start state,
>> and coding them to do so can have no effect other than possibly
>> masking problems.
> Well, it makes it a heck of a lot easier to run tests in isolation while
> evolving them. While I personally think it's good to leave cleanup for
> partial states in for cases where it was helpful during development, I
> also don't care about it strongly.
As far as that goes, making the tables temp is an even better solution.
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, pg@bowt.ie, heikki.linnakangas@iki.fi, robertmhaas@gmail.com
Subject: Re: tuplesort test coverage
In-Reply-To: <20446.1576353803@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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