Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Treat
Subject Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto
Date
Msg-id 200702122008.32355.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Responses Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sunday 11 February 2007 05:59, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 12:20:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >  I do
> > agree with adding a test when you think it is likely to be able to catch
> > a whole class of errors, or even a specific error if it seems especially
> > likely to recur, but right now I'm not seeing how we do that here.
>
> Well, currently the regression tests only make a handful of functional
> indexes, and never insert any data into any of them. So arguably
> there's a benefit to just adding a handful of inserts and updates
> somewhere to test these. That a whole area of code not currently
> tested.
>
> In my memory I remember a site that displayed the code coverage of the
> regression tests, but I can't find it now. Does anybody know?
>

Are you thinking of spikesource? According to thier numbers, we currently 
cover about 40% of the code base. 

http://developer.spikesource.com/info/search.php?c=POSTGRESQL&view=details

-- 
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeremy Drake
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix backend crash in parsing incorrect tsquery.
Next
From: Hideyuki Kawashima
Date:
Subject: Re: Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS