On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 07:46:43PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> That would be the easiest fix - but I'm starting to wonder if it shouldn't
> just be its own test module, as annoying as the boilerplate for that is.
>
> While the test improved code coverage for the various indexes noticeably, I
> did subsequently realize that the new test doesn't end up testing the recovery
> path :(. Better than nothing, but having any coverage of those paths might be
> worth the boilerplate and the runtime overhead of a test module :/
Adding just an EXTRA_INSTALL to isolation's Makefile would not work,
no? This Makefile has its own rules, which implies that fixing this
issue would be to duplicate what EXTRA_INSTALL does if we don't use
the test module solution. How about a new test/modules/gist/ then?
--
Michael