From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
        Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com>,
        Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
        Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>,
        pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade: Error out on too many command-line arguments
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908301622100.28828@lancre>
References: <f2554627-04e7-383a-ef01-ab99bb6a291c@2ndquadrant.com>
 <12750.1566743399@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAOBaU_a5kYkR5gV7nCwjY_ZxahzM95=XACSLwg3gd7L59K3JAA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190826044317.GC7005@paquier.xyz>
 <CALtqXTfTqTsrG4s4rHbHFE9bMwpgX7QWsDuD-hG1yX3BcJD_8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <2a70fc23-3545-d22d-2071-a42ee18757c9@2ndquadrant.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908300842470.28828@lancre> <15110.1567173253@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908301622100.28828@lancre>
Comments: In-reply-to Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
	message dated "Fri, 30 Aug 2019 16:40:11 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <24926.1567176468.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:47:48 -0400
Message-ID: <24927.1567176468@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes:
>> Is this issue *really* worth expending test cycles on forevermore?

> With this argument consistently applied, postgres code coverage is 
> consistently weak, with 25% of the code never executed, and 15% of 
> functions never called. "psql" is abysmal, "libpq" is really weak.

It's all a question of balance.  If you go too far in the other
direction, you end up with test suites that take an hour and a half
to run so nobody ever runs them (case in point, mysql).  I'm all for
improving coverage in meaningful ways --- but cases like this seem
unlikely to be worth ongoing expenditures of testing effort.

			regards, tom lane