First of sorry for replying late. I realized that I did not send the email
after typing it. My comments inline.
> > Hema: This separate suite was created after consulting with Magnus,
> > Lars, Manyi.
> > Also long back I sent an email to everyone asking
> suggestion about the same.
> > There was a plan to move all the tests to backup suite, so
> Magnus said
> > that there is no need to run all the backup tests with different
> > character sets combinations. That's the reason to create separate
> > backup_charsets after taking advice from him.
> Ok, now I understand. I was afraid we will have a separate
> suite for each aspect of backup which we are testing but now
> I see that there is a good reason for separating charset testing.
> >> This patch defines 2 test cases: backup_datatypes and
> >> backup_partitions. But LLD of the WL talks about 5 test cases.
> >> Moreover, neither of the test cases described in the WL seems to
> >> correspond to one of the 2 test cases implemented here.
> So, I would
> >> say that this patch does not implement the design described in the
> >> WL... Am I wrong?
> > Hema: No, you are correct. Actually I splitted some of the
> test cases
> > in to separate tests to have good coverage.
> > Also I thought that there is no specific test in backup
> that tests all
> > datatypes and all partitions alone, so I created separate
> tests. This
> > will help in running all datatypes/partitions with different
> > combinations of character sets/collations/storage engines.
> This way we
> > can have good test coverage.
> Hmm, but then why is the new test included in the WL about
> testing different character sets. If you need better tests
> for testing partitions and all datatypes then it should go to
> a different (new?) WL. Including it in the charsets WL is confusing.
Hema: I agree that it could go to a new WL, but currently I feel this is the
appropriate WL to include these testcases.
Also by virtue of this WL, test could be run with all character sets and
collation combinations and eventually provides very good test coverage.
Hence, I don't want to create a new WL. Let me know if you have any
questions. I will send you the new patch for review with additional test
cases and with slight modifications according to chuck's request.
> MySQL Code Commits Mailing List
> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/commits
> To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/commits?unsub=1