Re: [PATCH] Fix hostaddr crash during non-blocking cancellation
От | Jacob Champion |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Fix hostaddr crash during non-blocking cancellation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAOYmi+k5Q53iE9Y_yJjm_+BCNOsy467exDq2FTFdTpOnJpN8pQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Fix hostaddr crash during non-blocking cancellation (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 11:54 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I hadn't noticed (or maybe I forgot) this thread, so when the > same problem was reported at [1] I just went ahead and pushed the > submitted patch, which is only cosmetically different from your 0001. > Apologies for treading on your toes. No worries, as long as it's fixed I'm happy! (And many thanks to Greg for the review; sorry for not getting to it fast enough.) > As for the question of how to test this sort of thing, I'm not > too excited about the narrow-gauge test case your 0002 proposes. > What I did for manual testing in [1] was to hack the postgres_fdw > tests to connect using hostaddr instead of the default. I think > formalizing that sort of approach would yield much better coverage. I agree that overriding connection defaults probably gets us better overall coverage -- I just think I got pushback in the past for adding "multipliers" in that way. But I won't argue against test coverage as long as we get it in the end. :D That said, I am planning to get noisier about the lack of "TCP suite". The number of tests we've discarded just because we don't have a current place to put them keeps slowly growing, and my long-term intent with 0002 was to actually add a new place for them. Whatever formalization we choose, let's please keep a TCP-only cluster somewhere instead of forcing people to try to find a least-bad suite to slot new tests into. Thanks! --Jacob
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: