Two Coverity Scan volunteers needed

On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 11:33 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:

We need two (or more) PostgreSQL hackers to volunteer to regularly check the
Coverity reports and either fix/forward the bugs found, or (more often) mark
them as non-bugs in the Coverity system.

I take a look at this periodically. Apparently the last run of the tool
for Postgres happened on October 30th -- do you know if there's a way to
schedule more frequent runs?

-Neil

Neil,

I take a look at this periodically. Apparently the last run of the tool
for Postgres happened on October 30th -- do you know if there's a way to
schedule more frequent runs?

If we get volunteers set up, they will start running it daily.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 14:45:23 -0800
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:

Neil,

I take a look at this periodically. Apparently the last run of the
tool for Postgres happened on October 30th -- do you know if
there's a way to schedule more frequent runs?

If we get volunteers set up, they will start running it daily.

Would there be a way to script the responses to flag us for things
that are important?

Joshua D. Drake

- --
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHxJlIATb/zqfZUUQRAtUrAKCFhy/ZSwVrxyko8zDCpq2z1JFZsgCfdK4g
YkKMFzgmefGYmaV/oVj8seg=
=O6Kz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 14:57 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

Would there be a way to script the responses to flag us for things
that are important?

I think you need human verification / analysis, which isn't an easy
thing to script.

-Neil

On 27/02/2008, Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> wrote:

I think you need human verification / analysis, which isn't an easy
thing to script.

Is that site publicly accessible, do they have some sample
output that one could examine in regards to Joshua's parsing
idea?

-Neil

Cheers,
Andrej

--
Please don't top post, and don't use HTML e-Mail :} Make your quotes concise.

http://www.american.edu/econ/notes/htmlmail.htm

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 02:57:12PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

If we get volunteers set up, they will start running it daily.

Would there be a way to script the responses to flag us for things
that are important?

There was (briefly) a way for them to send emails whenever something
new was detected. That was kinda useful. However, the number of false
positives is quite large. Maybe it got better but last time I checked
(a while back admittedly) it didn't notice the ereport(ERROR,...) never
returned.

It is possible to export results, and I did that once for all the ECPG
errors so the developers could fix them. Looking at the latest results
it has a lot of warnings about dead-code in libstemmer, which is not
entirely surprising given that it's generated code.

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/