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

Re: Visibility regression test

From: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Visibility regression test
Date: 2002-08-29 17:47:47
Message-ID: tqmsmu08ddqhp94qm823oo2f9h3rg4g6cd@4ax.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:27:36 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
wrote:
>I don't like depending on a timeout *at all* in a regression test;
>the exact value of the timeout is not particularly relevant to my
>concern about it.

I agree.  But a timeout was the only thing that came to my mind for
aborting an endless loop.  Better suggestions are welcome.  Waiting
for the disk to get full will not be accepted :-)

>It surprises me quite a bit that there aren't any existing spots in
>the regression tests that would expose a Halloween problem ...

Me too.  BTW, why is this called the "Halloween problem"?

> I guess
>my other concern is that we shouldn't need a whole new test for this.

Again I agree.  First I wanted to insert these few lines into an
existing test, but didn't find one, where it seemed to fit.  The most
suitable one seemed to be vacuum.

Servus
 Manfred

In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-08-29 18:33:54
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] worried about PGPASSWORD drop
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-08-29 17:27:36
Subject: Re: Visibility regression test

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