Re: Testbed for predtest.c ... and some arguable bugs therein
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-03-08T17:14:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 12:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > A bit of hacking later, I have the attached. The set of test cases it > includes at the moment were mostly developed with an eye to getting to > full code coverage of predtest.c, but we could add more later. What's > really interesting is that it proves that the "weak refutation" logic, > i.e. predicate_refuted_by() with clause_is_check = true, is not > self-consistent. Oops. > I'm not sure that that's worth fixing right now. Instead I'm tempted > to revert the addition of the clause_is_check argument to > predicate_refuted_by, on the grounds that it's both broken and currently > unnecessary. Hmm, I think you were the one who pushed for adding that argument in the first place: http://postgr.es/m/31878.1497389320@sss.pgh.pa.us I have no problem with taking it back out, although I'm disappointed that I failed to find whatever was broken about it during review. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Commits
-
Improve predtest.c's internal docs, and enhance its functionality a bit.
- 5748f3a0aa7c 11.0 landed
-
Fix test_predtest's idea of what weak refutation means.
- a63c3274a688 11.0 landed
-
Add test scaffolding for exercising optimizer's predicate-proof logic.
- 44468f49bbe7 11.0 landed