GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — bpo-45243: Use connection limits to simplify `sqlite3` tests by erlend-aasland · Pull Request #29356 · python/cpython Conversation
|
|
🤖 New build scheduled with the buildbot fleet by @erlend-aasland for commit 22adb06 🤖 If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the ":hammer: test-with-buildbots" label again. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Bigmem tests rewriting does not look correct to me. These tests are specially purposed to test the integer overflow. They try with scripts of specific length (slightly below or above INT_MAX). It does not make sense to test scripts with smaller length. They are decorated with bigmemtest because they require a large amount of RAM and should be skipped if it is not enough.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
The C code explicitly checks the current connection limit (
cpython/Modules/_sqlite/cursor.c Lines 730 to 737 in 77a1f8d
cpython/Modules/_sqlite/statement.c Lines 62 to 68 in 77a1f8d
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
@serhiy-storchaka, let me know if you want me to revert the bigmem tests. I believe it is correct to change them, though (see my previous comment). |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay, let change these tests.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Thanks for reviewing, @serhiy-storchaka. What do you think of my proposed patch in #29356 (comment)? I guess it is out of scope for this PR, but I think we should apply it. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
FYI, I'll merge in |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
CI is ok; ready for merge :) I'll create an issue regarding the length checks. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
build-in round is missing if SQLITE_OMIT_FLOATING_POINT is defined
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Thank you for reviewing, Serhiy. The PR is in a better shape now. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.