| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: bgwriter, regression tests, and default shared_buffers settings |
| Date: | 2012-07-18 21:30:03 |
| Message-ID: | 50072ADB.3010105@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 07/18/2012 03:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> 2. It's rather disturbing that a fairly large swath of functionality
> just stopped getting tested at all by the buildfarm. Do we want to
> rethink the shared_buffers increase? Or artificially bloat the
> regression database to make it larger than 128MB? Or do something else
> to ensure we still exercise the DB-bigger-than-buffers case?
A couple of other ideas:
The buildfarm does have the ability to set config data after initdb has
run (which I just enhanced in the latest release). So a buildfarm owner
could add a config line for shared_buffers which would override what
initdb had set.
Or we could provide an initdb flag which would set an upper bound on
shared_buffers, and have make check (at least) use it.
I'd rather not bloat the regression database if we can reasonably avoid
it. Buildfarm members are often tight on space.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-18 21:31:06 | Re: row literal problem |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-18 21:17:26 | Re: [PERFORM] DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation |