so 8. 5. 2021 v 9:39 odesÃlatel David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> napsal:
> On Sat, 8 May 2021 at 19:03, Yura Sokolov <y.soko...@postgrespro.ru> > wrote: > > Perhaps there is need for flag "heavy asserts". Or option > "--enable-cassert=heavy". Then USE_ASSERT_CHECKING could be defined to > integer 1 or 2 depending on "heaviness" of enabled checks. > > I'd rather explore all other options before we went and did something > like that. The reason I feel this way is; a couple of jobs ago, I > worked on a project that had quite a large test suite. In order to > run the tests on a typical dev machine took about 16 hours. When > writing new tests, nobody really ever gave much thought to how long > tests would take to run. The time it took had already grown to > something much longer than was practical to run before a commit. > Instead, we had a test farm. We'd commit to master (yuck) and the test > farm would run the tests. Unfortunately, the farm was not big enough > to run every test on every commit, so if it encountered a test failure > (as it commonly did) it tried to bisect and find the first breaking > commit for that test then alert the person (probably the next day). > bisecting works out pretty badly when someone commits a build breaking > commit. > > Now that I work on PostgreSQL, I very much like the fact that I can > run make check-world -j and see very quickly that no tests fail. I'd > rather not have something like heavy asserts as I believe it would > just become a dumping ground for badly thought through Asserts that > most likely could be done in some better way that didn't require so > much effort. (I'll put mine in that category) It might not take long > before most committers opted to run make check-world without the heavy > asserts because it became just too slow. When that happens, it means > the buildfarm is left to catch these errors and most likely the > feedback will take much longer to get back to the committer due to the > animals running these flags also having to churn through the slow > tests. > > So, I'm -1 for "heavy asserts". > Personally, I have not problem with too slow assertions, although it is not too practical. The main problem is some shock, and feeling so some is wrong. I spent 1 hour detecting if it is a bug or not. Can it be possible to identify this situation? Maybe use some specific name of this routine - like assert_only_check_xxxx Then I can see this warning in perf, and I don't need to do other or deeper checks Regards Pavel > David >
