Re: Improve error reporting in 027_stream_regress test

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: Improve error reporting in 027_stream_regress test
Date: 2025-11-15 21:58:17
Message-ID: 193115.1763243897@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
>> We are getting PQPING_NO_RESPONSE meaning a lack of report activity
>> from the postmaster. An increase in timeout may help, but the host
>> seems like it's facing a high workload so it's not really possible to
>> come with a perfect number, just an estimation. How about adding a
>> --timeout to pg_isready based on PGCONNECT_TIMEOUT, like in the
>> attached?

> +1 for lengthening the timeout, as I see you already did.

I just marked the CF entry for this thread committed [1], because I
saw that the cfbot was reporting its patch-of-record as committed.
However, looking back now at the thread, it looks like there was
some unfinished work from earlier patches. If you are still
interested in pursuing that, please post a current patch to
de-confuse the bot and set the CF entry back to needs-review.

regards, tom lane

[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5900/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Treat 2025-11-15 23:52:15 Re: regarding statistics retaining with 18 Upgrade
Previous Message Joel Jacobson 2025-11-15 21:53:52 Re: Optimize LISTEN/NOTIFY