On 05/06/2016 02:48 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2016-05-06 14:39:57 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Yes, this is true but with a proper testing framework, I don't need a 15
>> minute break. I need 1 hour to configure, the rest just "happens" and
>> reports back.
>
> That only works if somebody writes such tests.
Agreed.
> And in that case the
> tester having run will often suffice (until related changes are being
> made). I'm not arguing against introducing more tests into the codebase
> - I rather fervently for that. But that really isn't what's going to
> avoid issues like this feature (or multixact) causing problems, because
> those tests will just test what the author thought of.
>
Good point. I am not sure how to address the alternative though.
>
>>>> You want me (or people like me) to test more? Give us an easy way to
>>>> do it.
>>>
>>> Useful additional testing and easy just don't go well together. By the
>>> time I have made it easy I've done the testing that's needed.
>>
>> I don't know that I can agree with this. A proper harness allows you to
>> execute: go.sh and boom... 2, 4, even 8 hours later you get a report. I will
>> not argue that it isn't easy to implement but I know it can be done.
>
> The problem is that the contents of go.sh are the much more relevant
> part than the 8 hours.
True.
Please don't misunderstand, I am not saying this is "easy". I just hope
that it is something we work for.
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.