On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 9:55 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > So I concur that indexing.sql's fastpath test > isn't adding anything useful coverage-wise, and will just nuke it.
Good. > (It'd be interesting perhaps to check whether the results shown > by coverage.postgresql.org are similarly unstable. They might be > less so, since I believe those are taken over the whole check-world > suite not just the core regression tests.) I'm almost certain that they're at least slightly unstable. I mostly find the report useful because it shows whether or not something gets hit at all. I don't trust it to be very accurate. I've noticed that the coverage reported on coverage.postgresql.org sometimes looks contradictory, which can happen due to compiler optimizations. I wonder if that could be addressed in some way, because I find the site to be a useful resource. I would at least like to know the settings used by its builds. -- Peter Geoghegan