Hi Tom, On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 12:05 AM Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
> > What makes you think this code isn't adequately tested already? > The coverage report at > > > https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/replication/logical/snapbuild.c.gcov.html > > shows SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn as pretty fully exercised. > > I wasn’t aware of this website before, so thank you for sharing it. Actually, this patch evolved from a tiny, "casual" quick-fix patch in its very first version. I agree that the current effort invested in it possible has outweighed the potential benefits it may bring. On a side note, I’m a beginner with PostgreSQL and trying to take on some simple tasks while deepening my understanding of the system. I noticed that many items in the coverage tests you provided have rather low coverage rates (< 75%). Do you think it would be worthwhile to add more test cases to improve their test coverage? I’d appreciate any advice the community can offer on this.
