PG16: Regression Tests #6139
Merged
PG16: Regression Tests #6139
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
fabriziomello
force-pushed
the
pg16-regression-tests
branch
from
73ca1af to
1302e30
Compare
fabriziomello
force-pushed
the
pg16-regression-tests
branch
6 times, most recently
from
d46077a to
ba1629f
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #6139 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 81.40% 81.43% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 246 246
Lines 56977 56932 -45
Branches 12626 12607 -19
==========================================
- Hits 46381 46363 -18
+ Misses 8214 8165 -49
- Partials 2382 2404 +22
... and 44 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
fabriziomello
force-pushed
the
pg16-regression-tests
branch
from
ba1629f to
dfdb2c8
Compare
|
@nikkhils, @svenklemm: please review this pull request.
|
svenklemm
reviewed
Oct 7, 2023
svenklemm
reviewed
Oct 7, 2023
svenklemm
approved these changes
Oct 7, 2023
fabriziomello
force-pushed
the
pg16-regression-tests
branch
3 times, most recently
from
2429117 to
39422a6
Compare
Merged
Added missing template output tests and also converted others to template due to output changes.
fabriziomello
force-pushed
the
pg16-regression-tests
branch
from
39422a6 to
272d938
Compare
jnidzwetzki
reviewed
Oct 9, 2023
| Heap Fetches: 1 | ||
| (19 rows) | ||
|
|
||
| -- test constants in ORDER BY |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For some reason, PG 16 does not use the SkipScan node for the following query. Instead, an Index Scan is used. Might be worth checking if this is just a cost-based decision or if the path is not generated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch ... will merge this PR and investigate it
jnidzwetzki
approved these changes
Oct 9, 2023
fabriziomello
added a commit
to fabriziomello/timescaledb
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 9, 2023
Seems there was some leftovers from timescale#6139 do be fixed.
fabriziomello
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 10, 2023
Seems there was some leftovers from #6139 do be fixed.
jnidzwetzki
pushed a commit
to jnidzwetzki/timescaledb
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 9, 2023
Seems there was some leftovers from timescale#6139 do be fixed.
jnidzwetzki
pushed a commit
to jnidzwetzki/timescaledb
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 19, 2023
Seems there was some leftovers from timescale#6139 do be fixed.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Added missing template output tests and also converted others to
template due to output changes.
Disable-check: force-changelog-file