Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 2:22 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> In the longer term, it's annoying that we have no test methodology >> for this other than "manually set a breakpoint here".
> One of the methods I see is we can just add some GUC variable for some > action injection. basically it adds some code based on the GUC like this;
See my straw-man proposal downthread. I'm not very excited about putting things like this into the standard build, because it's really hard to be sure that there are no security-hazard-ish downsides of putting in ways to get at testing behaviors from standard SQL. And then there's the question of whether you're adding noticeable overhead to production builds. So a loadable module that can use some existing hook to provide the needed behavior seems like a better plan to me, whenever we can do it that way.
In general, though, it seems like we've seldom regretted investments in test tooling.
regards, tom lane
Thanks for your explanation, I checked it again and it looks a very clean
method. The attached is a draft patch based on my understanding. Hope
