parallel bitmapscan isn't exercised in regression tests
Hi,
The parallel code-path isn't actually exercised in the tests added in
[1]: https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=f35742ccb7aa53ee3ed8416bbb378b0c3eeb6bb9
fixed.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
[1]: https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=f35742ccb7aa53ee3ed8416bbb378b0c3eeb6bb9
[2]: https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/executor/nodeBitmapHeapscan.c.gcov.html
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 12:16 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
Hi,
The parallel code-path isn't actually exercised in the tests added in
[1], as evidenced by [2] (they just explain). That imo needs to be
fixed.
Thanks for reporting. Attached patch fixes that.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachments:
parallel_bitmap_test.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=parallel_bitmap_test.patchDownload+7-0
On 2017-04-01 17:23:04 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 12:16 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
Hi,
The parallel code-path isn't actually exercised in the tests added in
[1], as evidenced by [2] (they just explain). That imo needs to be
fixed.Thanks for reporting. Attached patch fixes that.
That's better than before, but I'd appreciate working on a bit more
coverage. E.g. rescans probably aren't exercised in that test, right?
If you have time & energy, it'd also be good to expand the tests to
cover the prefetching logic - it's quite bad that it's currently not
tested at all :(
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
That's better than before, but I'd appreciate working on a bit more
coverage. E.g. rescans probably aren't exercised in that test, right?If you have time & energy, it'd also be good to expand the tests to
cover the prefetching logic - it's quite bad that it's currently not
tested at all :(
Sure I can do that, In attached patch, I only fixed the problem of not
executing the bitmap test. Now, I will add few cases to cover other
parts especially rescan and prefetching logic.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 5:51 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure I can do that, In attached patch, I only fixed the problem of not
executing the bitmap test. Now, I will add few cases to cover other
parts especially rescan and prefetching logic.
I have added two test cases to cover rescan, prefetch and lossy pages
logic for parallel bitmap. I have removed the existing case because
these two new cases will be enough to cover that part as well.
Now, nodeBitmapHeapScan.c has 95.5% of line coverage.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachments:
parallel_bitmap_test_v2.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=parallel_bitmap_test_v2.patchDownload+52-8
On 2017-04-06 10:00:32 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 5:51 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure I can do that, In attached patch, I only fixed the problem of not
executing the bitmap test. Now, I will add few cases to cover other
parts especially rescan and prefetching logic.I have added two test cases to cover rescan, prefetch and lossy pages
logic for parallel bitmap. I have removed the existing case because
these two new cases will be enough to cover that part as well.Now, nodeBitmapHeapScan.c has 95.5% of line coverage.
Great! Pushed.
- Andres
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 2017-04-06 13:43:55 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2017-04-06 10:00:32 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 5:51 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure I can do that, In attached patch, I only fixed the problem of not
executing the bitmap test. Now, I will add few cases to cover other
parts especially rescan and prefetching logic.I have added two test cases to cover rescan, prefetch and lossy pages
logic for parallel bitmap. I have removed the existing case because
these two new cases will be enough to cover that part as well.Now, nodeBitmapHeapScan.c has 95.5% of line coverage.
Great! Pushed.
At some point it might also be a good idea to compare parallel and
non-parallel results. It's obviously quite possible to break semantics
with parallelism...
- Andres
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers