Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Verite
Subject Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Date
Msg-id 3200d6d3-a82a-4778-b021-475b3adbe4dc@manitou-mail.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
    Vaishnavi Prabakaran wrote:

> Hmm, With batch mode, after sending COPY command to server(and server
> started processing the query and goes into COPY state) , client does not
> immediately read the result , but it keeps sending other queries to the
> server. By this time, server already encountered the error
> scenario(Receiving different message during COPY state) and sent error
> messages

IOW, the test intentionally violates the protocol and then all goes wonky
because of that.
That's why I was wondering upthread what's it's supposed to test.
I mean, regression tests are meant to warn against a desirable behavior
being unknowingly changed by new code into an undesirable behavior.
Here we have the undesirable behavior to start with.
What kind of regression could we fear from that?

Best regards,
--
Daniel Vérité
PostgreSQL-powered mailer: http://www.manitou-mail.org
Twitter: @DanielVerite



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Logical replication support for initial data copy
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Monitoring roles patch