On 05/06/2016 02:48 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2016-05-06 14:39:57 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Yes, this is true but with a proper testing framework, I don't need a 15
minute break. I need 1 hour to configure, the rest just "happens" and
reports back.
That only works if somebody writes such tests.
Agreed.
And in that case the
tester having run will often suffice (until related changes are being
made). I'm not arguing against introducing more tests into the codebase
- I rather fervently for that. But that really isn't what's going to
avoid issues like this feature (or multixact) causing problems, because
those tests will just test what the author thought of.
Good point. I am not sure how to address the alternative though.
You want me (or people like me) to test more? Give us an easy way to
do it.
Useful additional testing and easy just don't go well together. By the
time I have made it easy I've done the testing that's needed.
I don't know that I can agree with this. A proper harness allows you to
execute: go.sh and boom... 2, 4, even 8 hours later you get a report. I will
not argue that it isn't easy to implement but I know it can be done.
The problem is that the contents of go.sh are the much more relevant
part than the 8 hours.
True.
Please don't misunderstand, I am not saying this is "easy". I just hope
that it is something we work for.
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
