Message-ID: <5b4c6ce0-ed17-4abb-9127-859cc95cbdf3@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 03:40:06 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add Windows support for backtrace_functions (MSVC only)
To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro_Herrera?= <alvherre@kurilemu.de>,
 Jakub Wartak <jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
References: <202510300932.isdvgkzqzshk@alvherre.pgsql>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Bryan Green <dbryan.green@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <202510300932.isdvgkzqzshk@alvherre.pgsql>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5b4c6ce0-ed17-4abb-9127-859cc95cbdf3%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 10/30/2025 3:37 AM, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2025-Oct-30, Jakub Wartak wrote:
> 
>> Hi Bryan, cfbot is red. I'm was fan of having those tests for this
>> (bring complexity and we didn't have tests for Linux backtrace
>> anyway), but now MINGW win32 is failing on those tests where the
>> feature is not present:
> 
> I hate to say this after the code is written, but I think we should not
> put any tests in the first step.  I predict that these are going to be
> enormously brittle and that we'll waste a lot of time making them
> stable.  I think we should commit the Windows support for backtraces
> first, then consider whether we actually want TAP tests for the overall
> feature.  We've gone several years with glibc backtrace support without
> any tests -- why do we think the Windows implementation thereof _must_
> necessarily have them?
> 
It will not bother me to remove them.  It was my first effort at writing 
TAP tests, so it was a nice learning experience.