Thanks Alvaro! The thought of psql_help purely because it was the easiest at that time. Since I've just begun my understanding of the code is barely negligible.
I began working on SEQUENCE related tests thereafter and hopefully would move to more complicated tests in time. Peter's link is obviously helpful but since I end up doing make check ~100 of times a day, for now its useful only to cross-check how much code is uncommitted :) Robins On 11 March 2013 09:16, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > I think increasing coverage is a good thing. But psql help? *shrug* > backend code is far more interesting and useful. > > Another thing to keep in mind is that there are some corner cases that > are interesting to test that might not necessarily show up in a coverage > chart -- for example how stuff behaves in the face of concurrent > processes, or when various counters wrap around. > > Peter Eisentraut has set up a Jenkins instance that publishes coverage > info. > http://pgci.eisentraut.org/jenkins/job/postgresql_master_coverage/Coverage/ > (I think he only has it running "make check"; doing the isolation tests > probably raises percentages a bit). > >
