Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD
Date
Msg-id 11057.1548347725@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Responses Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes:
>> I had in mind something more like the attached.

> Yep.
> I'm not too happy that it mixes API levels, and about the int/double/int 
> path.
> Attached an updated version which relies on pg_jrand48 instead.

Hm, I'm not sure that's really an improvement, but I pushed it like that
(and the other change along with it).

> Also, as 
> the pseudo-random state is fully controlled, seeded test results are 
> deterministic so the expected value can be fully checked.

I found that the "expected value" was different in v11 than HEAD,
which surprised me.  It looks like the reason is that HEAD sets up
more/different RandomStates from the same seed than v11 did.  Not
sure if it's a good thing for this behavior to change across versions.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: problems with foreign keys on partitioned tables