"Daniel Verite" <daniel@manitou-mail.org> writes:
> These 2 tests need to allocate big chunks of contiguous memory, so they
> might fail for lack of memory on tiny machines, and even when not failing,
> they're pretty slow to run. Are they worth the trouble?
Yeah, I'd noticed those on previous readings of the patch. They'd almost
certainly fail on some of our older/smaller buildfarm members, so they're
not getting committed, even if they didn't require multiple seconds apiece
to run (even on a machine with plenty of memory). It's useful to have
them for initial testing though.
It'd be great if there was a way to test get_bit/set_bit on large
indexes without materializing a couple of multi-hundred-MB objects.
Can't think of one offhand though.
regards, tom lane