Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 2:22 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> In the longer term, it's annoying that we have no test methodology
>> for this other than "manually set a breakpoint here".
> One of the methods I see is we can just add some GUC variable for some
> action injection. basically it adds some code based on the GUC like this;
See my straw-man proposal downthread. I'm not very excited about putting
things like this into the standard build, because it's really hard to be
sure that there are no security-hazard-ish downsides of putting in ways to
get at testing behaviors from standard SQL. And then there's the question
of whether you're adding noticeable overhead to production builds. So a
loadable module that can use some existing hook to provide the needed
behavior seems like a better plan to me, whenever we can do it that way.
In general, though, it seems like we've seldom regretted investments in
test tooling.
regards, tom lane
