MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <7BD1ABDB-B03A-464A-9BA9-A73B55AD8A1F@getmailspring.com>
 <aLpENihhKL4vOxeX@nathan> <02DB5E92-1E94-4617-AC11-836486F63BD5@burd.me>
 <aLsvPdSHJdRCEk7v@nathan> <9E1E0BA4-952C-412A-884A-6E700F26B0CA@burd.me>
In-Reply-To: <9E1E0BA4-952C-412A-884A-6E700F26B0CA@burd.me>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 23:48:24 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAD21AoDijQoXik+U8hf0QptPvNcpjCjfzO_Rp=eCLYSL1D6OOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add tests for Bitmapset
To: "Burd, Greg" <greg@burd.me>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD21AoDijQoXik%2BU8hf0QptPvNcpjCjfzO_Rp%3DeCLYSL1D6OOQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 11:21=E2=80=AFAM Burd, Greg <greg@burd.me> wrote:
>
>
> > On Sep 5, 2025, at 2:43=E2=80=AFPM, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmai=
l.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 10:48:21AM -0400, Burd, Greg wrote:
> >> I looked at both radix tree and binary heap and how they use random se=
ts when
> >> testing.  Binary heap uses it to create different random sets of numbe=
rs to
> >> use across multiple tests while radix tree has a single function that =
focuses
> >> on randomized data.  I decided not to add randomization into the tests=
 of
> >> Bitmapset simply because I like avoiding non-deterministic behavior.  =
But in
> >> tests I guess that can be helpful finding future unknown corner cases.=
  I'm
> >> on the fence as to the value, your call.  :)
> >
> > I'm not too concerned about it.  We've lived without a dedicated test s=
uite
> > for Bitmapset for a very long time, so any amount of test coverage is a=
n
> > improvement.  Like you said, adding some randomization might be helpful=
 for
> > finding weird bugs we wouldn't have thought to test.  And, given the ma=
ny,
> > many machines that run the tests, IMHO it'd only help build even more
> > confidence in the code.  If my suggestion inspires you to update the pa=
tch,
> > great, but I'm fine with proceeding with what you already wrote, too.
>
> Nathan, thanks for considering the patch.  Honestly, I'm fine with it as =
is.
> We can revisit later if needed.  This does what I'd intended, test and do=
cument
> in code the API and implementation making future changes to that more
> transparent.

I appreciate your work on this. While I agree that adding more tests
to  bitmapset.c is a good idea, I'm concerned about the minimal
improvement in test coverage despite the addition of new test cases
(only three lines of code are newly covered). Apart from adding some
randomness to the tests we've discussed, given that we're implementing
a dedicated test module for bitmapset.c, I would expect to see a more
increase in test coverage.

Regards,

--=20
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com