Re: numeric_big in make check? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dean Rasheed
Subject Re: numeric_big in make check?
Date
Msg-id CAEZATCW0GvY1bLhea2r0H21-xsvj9uyN0z12sXWjnmv1s3gKMA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: numeric_big in make check?  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Responses Re: numeric_big in make check?
List pgsql-hackers
> > On 19 Feb 2024, at 12:48, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >
> > Or we could just flush it.  It's never detected a bug, and I think
> > you'd find that it adds zero code coverage (or if not, we could
> > fix that in a far more surgical and less expensive manner).
>

Off the top of my head, I can't say to what extent that's true, but it
wouldn't surprise me if at least some of the tests added in the last 4
commits to touch that file aren't covered by tests elsewhere. Indeed
that certainly looks like the case for 18a02ad2a5. I'm sure those
tests could be pared down though.

Regards,
Dean



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimize planner memory consumption for huge arrays
Next
From: Laurenz Albe
Date:
Subject: Re: Speeding up COPY TO for uuids and arrays