Excerpts from Kevin Grittner's message of mié ene 26 14:07:18 -0300 2011: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > Pounding for hours on 16 CPU box sounds good. What diagnostics or > > instrumentation are included with the patch? How will we know > > whether pounding for hours is actually touching all relevant parts > > of code? I've done such things myself only to later realise I > > wasn't actually testing the right piece of code. > > We've looked at distributions of failed transactions by ereport > statement. This confirms that we are indeed exercising the vast > majority of the code. See separate post for how we pushed execution > into the summarization path to test code related to that. BTW did you try "make coverage" and friends? See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/regress-coverage.html and http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/coverage/ -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
