On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> Instead of simply aborting a spec that specifies running commands on
> blocked sessions (what we call an invalid permutation), it seems more
> useful to report the problem, cleanup the sessions, and continue with
> the next permutation.
> This, in conjunction with the dry-run patch I submitted earlier, makes
> it easier to determine a working spec: dry-run the spec; copy the
> so-generated permutation lines into the spec; run the spec normally,
> which reports the invalid permutations; comment out the invalid
> permutations from the spec; done.
> The attached patch, again from Alexander Shulgin (with some tweaks from
> me) does that.
Seems sensible. I think we should avoid including invalid
permutations in our regression test suite, but this still seems useful
for the reasons you mention.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Erik Rijkers||Date: 2011-10-27 12:45:24|
|Subject: Re: (PATCH) Adding CORRESPONDING (NULL error)|
|Previous:||From: Florian Pflug||Date: 2011-10-27 12:03:23|
|Subject: Re: Hot Backup with rsync fails at pg_clog if under load|