Tom,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> New tests are not zero-cost; they create a distributed burden on the
> buildfarm and, by increasing the buildfarm cycle time, slow down feedback
> to authors of subsequent patches. So I'm very much not on board with
> any argument that "more tests
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2017-03-20 10:35:15 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I continue to be of the opinion that this entire discussion is quite
>> flipped from how we really should be running things- adding regression
>> tests to improve code coverage, particularly when
On 2017-03-20 10:35:15 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Robert,
>
> * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > I'm glad that you are working on fixing
> > pg_dump bugs and improving test coverage, but my gladness about that
> > does not extend to thinking that the processes which other people
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> I'm glad that you are working on fixing
> pg_dump bugs and improving test coverage, but my gladness about that
> does not extend to thinking that the processes which other people
> follow for their work should be waived for yours. Sorry.
To
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >> So was this 3340 line patch posted or discussed anyplace before it got
> >> committed?
> >
> > I've mentioned a
Peter,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 3/20/17 08:33, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> So was this 3340 line patch posted or discussed anyplace before it got
> >> committed?
> > I've mentioned a few times that I'm working on improving pg_dump
> > regression tests and
On 3/20/17 08:33, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> So was this 3340 line patch posted or discussed anyplace before it got
>> committed?
> I've mentioned a few times that I'm working on improving pg_dump
> regression tests and code coverage, which is what these were. I'm a bit
> surprised that it's,
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> So was this 3340 line patch posted or discussed anyplace before it got
> committed?
I've mentioned a few times that I'm working on improving pg_dump
regression tests and code coverage, which is what these were. I'm a bit
surprised that