Re: pgsql: Add TAP tests for pg_verify_checksums
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Add TAP tests for pg_verify_checksums |
Дата | |
Msg-id | be1a1ae4-ff0b-eff6-99bc-0d5ab8a810c3@2ndQuadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Add TAP tests for pg_verify_checksums (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql: Add TAP tests for pg_verify_checksums
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/14/2018 06:41 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 10:24:55AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> [snip] > Thanks a lot for the review, Andrew! > >> This code now seems redundant: >> >> if (strcmp(fn, ".") == 0 || >> strcmp(fn, "..") == 0) >> return true; > Indeed. I have renamed skipfile() to isRelFileName on the way, which > looks better in the context. > >> I would probably reverse the order of these two tests. It might not make any >> difference, assuming fn is never an empty string, but it seems more logical >> to me. >> >> + /* good to go if only digits */ >> + if (fn[pos] == '\0') >> + return false; >> + /* leave if no digits */ >> + if (pos == 0) >> + return true; > No objections to that. Done. > >> It also looks to me like the check for a segment number doesn't ensure >> there is at least one digit, so "123." might pass, but I could be >> wrong. In any case, there isn't a test for that, and there probably >> should be. > You are right here. This name pattern has been failing. Fixed in the > attached. I have added "123_" and "123_." as extra patterns to check. > > What do you think about the updated version attached? Looks good to me. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: