On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I'm in favor of just adding a debug option. We should introduce a more
>> general idea of a #define that enables a variety of debugging options,
>> because it's silly to have to worry about buildfarm coverage each and
>> every time this crops up. I'm not entirely sure what level that should
>> be scoped at. The status quo is impractical.
>
> I don't exactly see how that leads to any improvement --- you still end
> up having to manually configure some buildfarm critters for coverage, no?
Yes, but you only have to do it once. I don't see the problem with
creating a #define that represents a grab-bag of debug options that
should run on one or two buildfarm animals. That doesn't preclude also
allowing things like RAW_EXPRESSION_COVERAGE_TEST to be enabled more
selectively.
In short, I want to make it easier to add custom debugging options
that could trip a regression test failure.
--
Peter Geoghegan
