Re: [HACKERS] Coverage improvements of src/bin/pg_basebackup and pg_receivewal --endpos - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Coverage improvements of src/bin/pg_basebackup and pg_receivewal --endpos
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqTAzSpK5b322si5djGHSU0kRefkLuHj4RX7nkAwe-vi1A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Coverage improvements of src/bin/pg_basebackup and pg_receivewal --endpos  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Coverage improvements of src/bin/pg_basebackup andpg_receivewal --endpos
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> While it is possible to tackle some of those issues independently,
> like pg_basebackup stuff, it seems to me that it would be helpful to
> make the tests more deterministic by having an --endpos option for
> pg_receivewal, similarly to what exists already in pg_recvlogical.
>
> Thoughts?

I have just played with that, and attached is a patch to implement the
so-said option with a basic set of tests, increasing code coverage of
pg_receivewal.c from 15% to 60%. I'll park that in the next CF of
September.
-- 
Michael

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Alter subscription..SET - NOTICE message is comingfor table which is already removed
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] BUG #14682: row level security not work with partitionedtable