On 11/10/21 09:53, Tom Lane wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
>>> On 10 Nov 2021, at 13:37, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>>> ..but I wonder what's the *benefit* of removing those includes. IOW, what's
>>> the reason not to simply drop the patch?
>> I think the value is mostly neatnikism, the actual effect on runtime is
>> unlikely to be measureable. I won't argue against doing it, but I suspect
>> we'll just slowly add a lot of these back as tests evolve making excercise
>> less useful.
> Yeah, that last was pretty much my reaction. I don't know enough about
> Perl to be sure how much an unused import costs, but I suspect you're
> right that it won't be measurable in context, considering that most of
> these test scripts run at least one initdb.
>
>
:Cluster uses :Utils, and perl is smart enough not to try to reprocess
the module. Thus the extra cost here is almost certainly very close to zero.
This is a perfectly reasonable piece of boilerplate to use at the top of
a TAP test:
use strict;
use warnings;
use PostgreSQL:Test::Cluster;
use PostgreSQL::Test::Utils;
use Test::More;
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com