On 2021-Apr-08, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 02:58:02AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > No, because if that were the explanation then we'd be getting no
> > buildfarm coverage at all for for pg_stat_statements. Which aside
> > from being awful contradicts the results at coverage.postgresql.org.
>
> Is there any chance that coverage.postgresql.org isn't backed by the buildfarm
> client but a plain make check-world or something like that?
Yes, coverage.pg.org runs "make check-world".
Maybe it would make sense to change that script, so that it runs the
buildfarm's run_build.pl script instead of "make check-world". That
would make coverage.pg.org report what the buildfarm actually tests ...
it would have made this problem a bit more obvious.
--
Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W
