Re: TESTING (was: RE: More vacuum.c refactoring )

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 2:35 PM
> To: Dann Corbit
> Cc: Manfred Koizar; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: TESTING (was: RE: [HACKERS] More vacuum.c refactoring )
>
>
> "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com> writes:
> >> --- and no I have zero confidence that passing the regression
> >> tests proves anything, because all those prior bugs passed
> >> the regression tests.
>
> > Then why didn't those bugs get added to the regression?
>
> Because there wasn't any reasonable way to make them reproducible.
>
> The set of things we can test in the regression tests is only
> a small fraction of the interesting properties of Postgres.
> This is unfortunate but ranting about "standard practice"
> doesn't change it.
>
> > I seem to recall that someone was porting the NIST suite to
> > PostgreSQL. What ever happened to that effort?
>
> It was done and we fixed a couple of bugs based on it (the
> one I can think of offhand had to do with semantics of
> aggregate functions in sub-selects).  I don't think there's
> anything more to be learned there.

It is reassuring to know that it passed with flying colors.

Can I get the ported version?

I would love to play with it.