Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
From: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org>, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Date: 2007-02-13T01:08:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sunday 11 February 2007 05:59, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 12:20:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I do
> > agree with adding a test when you think it is likely to be able to catch
> > a whole class of errors, or even a specific error if it seems especially
> > likely to recur, but right now I'm not seeing how we do that here.
>
> Well, currently the regression tests only make a handful of functional
> indexes, and never insert any data into any of them. So arguably
> there's a benefit to just adding a handful of inserts and updates
> somewhere to test these. That a whole area of code not currently
> tested.
>
> In my memory I remember a site that displayed the code coverage of the
> regression tests, but I can't find it now. Does anybody know?
>
Are you thinking of spikesource? According to thier numbers, we currently
cover about 40% of the code base.
http://developer.spikesource.com/info/search.php?c=POSTGRESQL&view=details
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL