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 1i3iIy-0002pm-74 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 14:55:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i3iIv-0007Xl-T4 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 14:55:09 +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 1i3iIv-0007Qh-Hf for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 14:55:09 +0000 Received: from courriel.mines-paristech.fr ([77.158.173.149] helo=antispam-1.ensmp.fr) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i3iIt-0000mU-EJ for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 14:55:09 +0000 Received: from smtp-4.mines-paristech.fr (smtp-4.ensmp.fr [77.158.173.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by antispam-1.ensmp.fr (antispam.mines-paristech.fr) with ESMTPS id B2F2E56018; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 16:55:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lancre (184.86.8.93.rev.sfr.net [93.8.86.184]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-4.mines-paristech.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 507E82C024B; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 16:55:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 16:55:05 +0200 (CEST) From: Fabien COELHO X-X-Sender: fabien@lancre To: Tom Lane cc: Peter Eisentraut , Ibrar Ahmed , Michael Paquier , Julien Rouhaud , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: pg_upgrade: Error out on too many command-line arguments In-Reply-To: <24927.1567176468@sss.pgh.pa.us> Message-ID: References: <12750.1566743399@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20190826044317.GC7005@paquier.xyz> <2a70fc23-3545-d22d-2071-a42ee18757c9@2ndquadrant.com> <15110.1567173253@sss.pgh.pa.us> <24927.1567176468@sss.pgh.pa.us> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-CLAMAV-SCAN: ok X-VRSPAM-SCORE: -100 X-VRSPAM-STATE: legit X-VRSPAM-CAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrudeigedgkedvucetufdoteggodetrfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvufgjkfhffgggtgesthdtredttdervdenucfhrhhomhephfgrsghivghnucevqffgnffjqfcuoegtohgvlhhhohestghrihdrvghnshhmphdrfhhrqeenucfkphepleefrdekrdekiedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuth X-VRSPAM-EXTCAUSE: mhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhht List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk >>> 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. Sure. I think there is room for several classes of tests, important ones always run and others run say by the farm, and I thought that is what TAP tests were for, given they are quite expensive anyway (eg most TAP test create their own postgres instance). So for me the suggestion was appropriate for a pgbench-specific TAP test. -- Fabien.