> +const char* forwardedData = "ForwardedData";
> +
> static void
> -init_tranche(void *ptr)
> +init_tranche(void *ptr, const char *name, void *arg)
> {
> int *tranche_id = (int *) ptr;
>
> - *tranche_id = LWLockNewTrancheId("test_dsa");
> + if (arg != forwardedData) {
> + elog(ERROR, "Didn't receive expected arg pointer");
> + }
> +
> + *tranche_id = LWLockNewTrancheId(name);
> }
>
> As otherwise we no longer test the value of the pointer in any of the
> tests with the additional name parameter.
Good call adding the tests. I do get compilation errors though with
v3, due to passing a const to a void pointer. I think this test could be
made better by checking that the arg data matches some data that
we expect.
```
-init_tranche(void *ptr)
+init_tranche(void *ptr, const char *name, void *arg)
{
int *tranche_id = (int *) ptr;
- *tranche_id = LWLockNewTrancheId("test_dsa");
+ /* Verify arg if given */
+ if (arg && strcmp(name, (char *) arg) != 0)
+ elog(ERROR, "didn't receive expected arg data");
+
+ *tranche_id = LWLockNewTrancheId(name);
}
```
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
