On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 5:56 PM Petr Jelinek <p...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 04/04/2020 07:25, Tom Lane wrote: > > Petr Jelinek <p...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > >> On 03/04/2020 17:51, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> But the forked-off children have to write the gcov files independently, > >>> don't they? > > > >> Hmm that's very good point. I did see these missing coverage issue when > >> running tests that explicitly start more instances of postgres before > >> though. And with some quick googling, parallel testing seems to be issue > >> with gcov for more people. > > > > I poked around and found this: > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-help/2005-11/msg00074.html > > > > which says > > > > gcov instrumentation is multi-process safe, but not multi-thread > > safe. The multi-processing safety relies on OS level file locking, > > which is not available on some systems. > > > > That would explain why it works for me, but then there's a question > > of why it doesn't work for you ... > > Hmm, I wonder if it has something to do with docker then (I rarely run > any tests directly on the main system nowadays). But that does not > explain why it does not work for Amit either.
One thing to I must clarify: coverage for most of pgoutput.c looks okay on each run. I am concerned that the coverage for the code added by the patch is shown to be close to zero, which is a mystery to me, because I can confirm by other means such as debugging elogs() to next to the new code that the newly added tests do cover them. -- Thank you, Amit Langote EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
