On Thu, 19 Sept 2024 at 22:17, Tatsuo Ishii <is...@postgresql.org> wrote: > Attached patch fixes 1 & 2.
I looked at this and thought that one thing you might want to consider is adjusting show_storage_info() to accept the size and type parameters so you don't have to duplicate the formatting code in show_recursive_union_info(). The first of the new tests also isn't testing what you want it to test. Maybe you could add a "materialized" in there to stop the CTE being inlined: explain (analyze,costs off) with w(n) as materialized (select n from generate_series(1,10) a(n)) select sum(n) from w Also, I'm on the fence about if the new tests are worthwhile. I won't object to them, however. I just wanted to note that most of the complexity is in tuplestore.c of which there's already coverage for. The test's value is reduced by the fact that most of the interesting details have to be masked out due to possible platform variations in the number of bytes. Really the new tests are only testing that we display the storage details and maybe that the storage type came out as expected. It seems unlikely these would get broken. I'd say it's committers preference, however. I just wanted to add my thoughts. You have to offset the value against the fact that the expected output is likely to change over the years which adds to the burden of making changes to the EXPLAIN output. David