Re: Going for "all green" buildfarm results

Tom Lane wrote:

>Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
>
>
>>Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:44:44AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>The path of least resistance might just be to not run these tests in
>>>>parallel. The chance of this issue causing problems in the real world
>>>>seems small.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>It doesn't seem that unusual to want to rename an index on a running
>>>system, and it certainly doesn't seem like the kind of operation that
>>>should pose a problem. So at the very least, we'd need a big fat warning
>>>in the docs about how renaming an index could cause other queries in the
>>>system to fail, and the error message needs to be improved.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>it is my understanding that Tom is already tackling the underlying issue
>>on a much more general base ...
>>
>>
>
>Done in HEAD, but we might still wish to think about changing the
>regression tests in the back branches, else we'll probably continue to
>see this failure once in a while ...
>
>
>
>

How sure are we that this is the cause of the problem? The feeling I got
was "this is a good guess". If so, do we want to prevent ourselves
getting any further clues in case we're wrong? It's also an interesting
case of a (low likelihood) bug which is not fixable on any stable branch.

cheers

andrew