Re: Trying to add more tests to gistbuild.c

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 29th, 2022 at 19:53, Tom Lane tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:

> I wonder if we can combine ideas from the two patches to get a
> better tradeoff of code coverage vs. runtime.

I was checking the Pavel patch and notice that he was using the fillfactor
parameter when creating the gist index. I changed my previous patch to include
this parameter and the code coverage of gistbuild.c and gistbuildbuffers.c was
improved to 97.7% and 92.8% respectively.

I'm attaching this new patch, could you please check if this change make sense
and also don't impact the test runtime?

> Another thing we might consider is to move the testing responsibility
> somewhere else. The reason I'm allergic to adding a lot of runtime
> here is that the core regression tests are invoked at least four times
> in a standard buildfarm run, often more. But that concern could be
> alleviated if we put the test somewhere else. Maybe contrib/btree_gist
> would be suitable?

I can't say much about it. If there's anything I can do here, please let
me know.

--
Matheus Alcantara