On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 4:30 PM Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 4:12 PM Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:40 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > > > > On 2023-Feb-20, Amit Langote wrote: > > > >> One more thing we could try is come up with a postgres_fdw test case, > > > >> because it uses the RelOptInfo.userid value for remote-costs-based > > > >> path size estimation. But adding a test case to contrib module's > > > >> suite test a core planner change might seem strange, ;-). > > > > > > > Maybe. Perhaps adding it in a separate file there is okay? > > > > > > There is plenty of stuff in contrib module tests that is really > > > there to test core-code behavior. (You could indeed argue that > > > *all* of contrib is there for that purpose.) If it's not > > > convenient to test something without an extension, just do it > > > and don't sweat about that. > > > > OK. Attached adds a test case to postgres_fdw's suite. You can see > > that it fails without a316a3bc. > > Noticed that there's an RfC entry for this in the next CF. Here's an > updated version of the patch where I updated the comments a bit and > the commit message. > > I'm thinking of pushing this on Friday barring objections.
Seeing none, I've pushed this to HEAD and 16. Marking the CF entry as committed. -- Thanks, Amit Langote EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
