Re: [PATCH] Add tests for Bitmapset
От | Greg Burd |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Add tests for Bitmapset |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20200C9C-8DA3-413F-AE9A-60D6761DD060@burd.me обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Add tests for Bitmapset (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Add tests for Bitmapset
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sep 11, 2025, at 9:36 PM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 06:56:07AM -0400, Greg Burd wrote:Just for reference I started this not to increase coverage, which is a goodgoal just not the one I had. I was reviewing the API and considering somechanges based on other work I've done. Now that I see how deeply baked inthis code is I think that's unlikely. Maybe something else distinct forbitmaps over 64-bit space at some point will be useful. I wrote this codejust to capture the API in test form.How much does this measure in terms of numbers produced bycoverage-html (see [1])? The paths taken don't always matter as itcan also be important to check combinations of code paths that aretaken by other tests when checking after edge cases, but that wouldgive an idea of gain vs extra runtime. Not objecting to your patch,just being curious as I am not seeing any numbers posted on thisthread.[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/regress-coverage.html--Michael
Sawada-san, Michael,
Thank you both for the push to measure. Before the patch as it stands now the
coverage for src/backend/nodes/bitmapset.c is 63.5% and after it is 66.5%. Not
an amazing difference, but something. I guess I expected this to be higher given
the degree to which this datatype is used.
I'll review the gaps in coverage and update the tests. I'll look for a way to add
meaningful randomization.
-greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: