Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
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

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
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

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Andres Freund
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

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
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

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
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

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
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

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
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,

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
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