Re: Recent eelpout failures on 9.x branches

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Recent eelpout failures on 9.x branches
Date: 2020-12-01 23:07:17
Message-ID: 1531503.1606864037@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Unfortunately, eelpout got kicked off the nice shiny ARM server it was
> running on so last week I moved it to a rack mounted Raspberry Pi. It
> seems to be totally I/O starved causing some timeouts to be reached,
> and I'm looking into fixing that by adding fast storage. This may
> take a few days. Sorry for the noise.

Ah-hah. Now that I look, eelpout is very clearly slower overall
than it was a couple weeks ago, so all is explained.

It might still be reasonable to raise wal_sender_timeout in the
buildfarm environment, though. We usually try to make sure that
buildfarm timeouts border on ridiculous, not just because of
underpowered critters but also for cases like CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS
animals.

I'm also wondering a bit why the issue isn't affecting the newer
branches. It's certainly not because we made the test shorter ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2020-12-01 23:26:53 Re: room for improvement in amcheck btree checking?
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2020-12-01 23:05:21 Re: proposal: unescape_text function