Re: Increasing test coverage of WAL redo functions

On 2014-11-19 11:54:47 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >  Schema |       Name       | Type  | Owner  |  Size   | Description
> > --------+------------------+-------+--------+---------+-------------
> >  public | btree_tall_tbl   | table | heikki | 24 kB   |
> >  public | btree_test_tbl   | table | heikki | 392 kB  |
> >  public | gin_test_tbl     | table | heikki | 588 MB  |
> >  public | gist_point_tbl   | table | heikki | 1056 kB |
> >  public | spgist_point_tbl | table | heikki | 1056 kB |
> >  public | spgist_text_tbl  | table | heikki | 1472 kB |
> > (6 rows)
> 
> I think it's good to have these tests, though Tom was complaining
> earlier about the size of the regression test database.  Would it work
> to have this in a separate test suite, like the numeric_big stuff?
> We can have it run optionally, and perhaps set up a few buildfarm
> members to exercise them on a regular basis.

I think the tests except the gin one are resonably sized - I'd much
rather run them all the time. We shouldn't make the buildfarm
configuration unnecessarily complex.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services