On 01/23/2013 09:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-01-23 11:44:29 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Yeah, and a lot more fairly-new developers who don't understand all the >>> connections in the existing system. Let me just push back a bit here: >>> based on the amount of time I've had to spend fixing bugs over the past >>> five months, 9.2 was our worst release ever. I don't like that trend, >>> and I don't want to see it continued because we get laxer about >>> accepting patches. IMO we are probably too lax already. >> >> Really? Hmm, that's not good. I seem to recall 8.4.x being pretty >> bad, and some of the recent bugs we fixed were actually 9.1.x problems >> that slipped through the cracks. > > FWIW I concur with Tom's assessment.
The only way to fix increasing bug counts is through more-comprehensive regular testing. Currently we have regression/unit tests which cover maybe 30% of our code. Performance testing is largely ad-hoc. We don't require comprehensive acceptance testing for new patches. And we have > 1m lines of code. Of course our bug count is increasing. I'm gonna see if I can do something about improving our test coverage. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
