From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Some other odd buildfarm failures |
Date: | 2014-12-26 16:24:00 |
Message-ID: | 20141226162400.GC1645@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Still, I don't think this is a reasonable test design. We have
> >> absolutely no idea what behaviors are being triggered in the other
> >> tests, except that they are unrelated to what those tests think they
> >> are testing.
>
> > I can of course move it to a separate parallel test, but I don't think
> > that should be really necessary.
>
> I've not proven this rigorously, but it seems obvious in hindsight:
> what's happening is that when the object_address test drops everything
> with DROP CASCADE, other processes are sometimes just starting to execute
> the event trigger when the DROP commits. When they go to look up the
> trigger function, they don't find it, leading to "cache lookup failed for
> function".
Hm, maybe we can drop the event trigger explicitely first, then wait a
little bit, then drop the remaining objects with DROP CASCADE?
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-12-26 16:27:02 | Re: Some other odd buildfarm failures |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-12-26 15:52:58 | Re: What exactly is our CRC algorithm? |