Hi Derrick and Victoria. On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 1:14 AM Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > You mention in your cover letter that the ensure_not_expanded tests > are not added yet (same with performance tests). Now that you've > gotten feedback on this version of the patch, I might recommend the > organization you might want for a full series: > > 1. Add these 'mv' tests to t1092 _without_ the code change. These > tests should work when the index is expanded, and making the > code change to not expand the index shouldn't change the > behavior. > > 2. Add the performance test so we have a baseline to measure how > well 'mv' does in the normal case (and how it is slower when > expanding the index). I'm a bit caught up here. Do I just do a before-code-change test and after-code-change test, and benchmark the after against the before? Or do you mean I should also perf test out-of-cone arguments with 'mv' so that the index could be expanded? According to my understanding, the sparse-index could be required to expand when out-of-cone actions happen and the 'ensure_full_index()' is called. And do a 3-way comparison among before-code-change, after-code-change, and after-code-change- index-expanded, no? -- Thanks & Regards, Shaoxuan
