Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jacob Champion
Тема Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser
Дата
Msg-id CAOYmi+=MxQ_E9EfmNwUS4z3hJvCjXXz5wBTad5O++zwcY45NuQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Ответы Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 4:54 AM Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> On 2024-04-09 Tu 01:23, Michael Paquier wrote:
> There is no direct check on test_json_parser_perf.c, either, only a
> custom rule in the Makefile without specifying something for meson.
> So it looks like you could do short execution check in a TAP test, at
> least.
>
> Not adding a test for that was deliberate - any sane test takes a while, and I didn't want to spend that much time on
itevery time someone runs "make check-world" or equivalent. However, adding a test to run it with a trivial number of
iterationsseems reasonable, so I'll add that. I'll also add a meson target for the binary. 

Okay, but for what purpose? My understanding during review was that
this was a convenience utility for people who were actively hacking on
the code (and I used it for exactly that purpose a few months back, so
I didn't question that any further). Why does the farm need to spend
any time running it at all?

--Jacob



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Stefan Fercot
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: post-freeze damage control
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: IPC::Run::time[r|out] vs our TAP tests