RE: Question for coverage report
| От | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) |
|---|---|
| Тема | RE: Question for coverage report |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | OSCPR01MB14966F2C1919204C0BA8C72AEF5F3A@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Question for coverage report (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Question for coverage report
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Álvaro, Tom,
Thanks for giving some low-layer information. I understood like:
gcov does not actually count each line, counts a chunk of codes. Boundaries are
not same as code paths, before-and-after the if {} can be in the same chunk.
Per above, I could consider in pguotput.c., line 1495 was actually executed but
1503 was counted when it reached line 1494. Another question is why one of the
branch was reported as 100% and another one was 0%. Is it just because counts
was less than 1/100?
I googled some articles but could not find.
```
183433: 1494: if (!is_publishable_relation(relation))
call 0 returned 100%
branch 1 taken 100% (fallthrough)
branch 2 taken 0%
1171: 1495: return;
```
Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: