How did you evaluate that coverage increased "greatly"? I am not
generally against these tests but I'd be surprised if the overall test
coverage improved noticeably by this. Which makes 10% runtime overhead
pretty hefty if the goal is to actually achieve a high coverage.

I was relying on Robins' numbers of coverage:

Those improvements rather likely end up being an improvement a good bit
less than one percent for the whole binary.

Yes, but it is a valuable percent nevertheless.

As I understand it, the coverage is about the tested command logic. A lot this logic is dedicated to check permissions (can you add an operator to this database? ...) and to verify required conditions (is the function proposed for operator has the right signature? does the operator overwrite an existing one? ...).

--
Fabien.


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to