On 2/1/16 4:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> .... Anyway I think the tests here are >> massive and the code is not; perhaps people get the mistaken impression >> that this is a huge amount of code which scares them. Perhaps you could >> split it up in (1) code and (2) tests, which wouldn't achieve any >> technical benefit but would offer some psychological comfort to >> potential reviewers. You know it's all psychology in these parts. > > Perhaps the tests could be made less bulky. We do not need massive > permanent regression tests for a single feature, IMO.
I'd certainly like to but pgaudit uses a lot of different techniques to log various commands and there are a number of GUCs. Each test provides coverage for a different code path. I'm sure they could be reorganized and tightened up a but I don't think by a whole lot. -- -David da...@pgmasters.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
