Re: Does PostgreSQL have complete functional test cases?
| От | Tianyin Xu |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Does PostgreSQL have complete functional test cases? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABBDWwf761JOHJf2JsRmvoNNkv1+Aj+kpVw2n_iKgn9NxqWYkg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Does PostgreSQL have complete functional test cases? (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Does PostgreSQL have complete functional test cases?
(Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Re: Does PostgreSQL have complete functional test cases? (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
Thanks, Craig,
Yes, I know "context diff". What I don't know is whether + or - some rows is a big problem, let's say correctness problem. I didn't write the test cases so I don't know what these test cases are exactly doing.
If you tell me the failure of these test cases are severe and not acceptable, I'm fine with it. It means these configurations are not allowed.
For this particular case, I figured out that it's because of the following settings,
cpu_index_tuple_cost = 2147483647
which assigned a big number to the cpu_index_tuple_cost, affecting the query planner.
But to me, the configuration settings should not affect the correctness, right? Because whatever optimizations you do, the results should be the same (what matters is the performance). And that's why I need testing before adjusting these values.
T
--
Tianyin XU,
http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~tixu/
Yes, I know "context diff". What I don't know is whether + or - some rows is a big problem, let's say correctness problem. I didn't write the test cases so I don't know what these test cases are exactly doing.
If you tell me the failure of these test cases are severe and not acceptable, I'm fine with it. It means these configurations are not allowed.
For this particular case, I figured out that it's because of the following settings,
cpu_index_tuple_cost = 2147483647
which assigned a big number to the cpu_index_tuple_cost, affecting the query planner.
But to me, the configuration settings should not affect the correctness, right? Because whatever optimizations you do, the results should be the same (what matters is the performance). And that's why I need testing before adjusting these values.
T
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Changed "something". What did you change?On 11/09/2012 03:28 AM, Tianyin Xu wrote:Thanks a lot, Pavel, Jeff, Andres!
I just changed the configuration file, postgresql.conf.
Using the default one, all the regress tests are passed (so it should not be the block size?). But when I changed something, quite a number of tests are failed.This is a context diff. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diff#Context_format .! 0 | 998 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | AAAAAA | KMBAAA | OOOOxx
1 | 214 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | BAAAAA | GIAAAA | OOOOxx
2 | 326 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 5 | CAAAAA | OMAAAA | OOOOxx
3 | 431 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 7 | DAAAAA | PQAAAA | VVVVxx
- 4 | 833 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 9 | EAAAAA | BGBAAA | HHHHxx
5 | 541 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 11 | FAAAAA | VUAAAA | HHHHxx
- 6 | 978 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 12 | 13 | GAAAAA | QLBAAA | OOOOxx
7 | 647 | 1 | 3 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 14 | 15 | HAAAAA | XYAAAA | VVVVxx
8 | 653 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 16 | 17 | IAAAAA | DZAAAA | HHHHxx
! 9 | 49 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 18 | 19 | JAAAAA | XBAAAA | HHHHxx
Lines beginning with + mean the line is added. Lines with - mean the line is removed. Lines with ! mean the line is changed.
Here, you can see that two rows are not output that should be, and two others are output with different-than-expected values; they could've been swapped with each other, or just have totally unexpected values. See the expected/ files for the output that should be produced.
--
Craig Ringer
--
Tianyin XU,
http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~tixu/
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: