Re: Improving test coverage of extensions with pg_dump
От | Andreas Karlsson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Improving test coverage of extensions with pg_dump |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 55BA9A18.3030202@proxel.se обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Improving test coverage of extensions with pg_dump (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Improving test coverage of extensions with pg_dump
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 07/30/2015 04:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:54 AM, Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se> wrote: >> What I do not like though is how the path src/test/tables_fk/t/ tells us >> nothing about what features are of PostgreSQL are tested here. For this I >> personally prefer the earlier versions where I think that was clear. > > +Simple module used to check data dump ordering of pg_dump with tables > +linked with foreign keys. > The README mentions that this is to test pg_dump, perhaps referring to > the TAP tests makes sense as well? The comment is good, but what I personally do not like is that the path to the test suite is non-obvious and not self explanatory I would not expect src/test/tables_fk/t/ to test pg_dump and extensions. I find it to confusing to regard the test suite as testing an extension called "tables_fk" since in my mind that is just a necessary tool built to test something else. This is obviously a subjective thing, and I see that for example Heikki likes it the way it is. I am fine with setting this as ready for committer and and let a committer weigh in on the naming. >> Another thought: would it be worthwhile to also add an assertion to check if >> the data really was restored properly or would that just be redundant code? > > That seems worth doing, hence added something for it. Thanks for the suggestion. > > At the same time I have added an entry in .gitignore for the generated > tmp_check/. Nice changes. -- Andreas
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: