Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test
Date: 2006-06-28 17:58:13
Message-ID: 28293.1151517493@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> If this were a significant risk wouldn't we have seen many such failures 
> before now?

Hard to tell.  It's possibly architecture-dependent, for one thing
(MAXALIGN will affect space availability).  Since this happened in a
parallel regression run, it could also be a matter of timing relative to
the concurrent tests.  I've often thought that we are not getting as much
mileage out of the parallel-testing facility as we could, because it's
really not exercising variations in timing all that much.  It'd be
interesting to throw in a small random delay at the start of each member
of a concurrent set of tests.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-06-28 17:59:32
Subject: Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2006-06-28 17:56:09
Subject: Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group