Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.
Date: 2015-03-11 05:47:25
Message-ID: 20150311054725.GB294547@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Mar 08, 2015 at 08:19:39PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> So I am planning to seriously focus soon on this stuff, basically
> using the TAP tests as base infrastructure for this regression test
> suite. First, does using the TAP tests sound fine?

Yes.

> On the top of my mind I got the following items that should be tested:
> - WAL replay: from archive, from stream
> - hot standby and read-only queries
> - node promotion
> - recovery targets and their interferences when multiple targets are
> specified (XID, name, timestamp, immediate)
> - timelines
> - recovery_target_action
> - recovery_min_apply_delay (check that WAL is fetch from a source at
> some correct interval, can use a special restore_command for that)
> - archive_cleanup_command (check that command is kicked at each restart point)
> - recovery_end_command (check that command is kicked at the end of recovery)
> - timeline jump of a standby after reconnecting to a promoted node

Those sound good. The TAP suites still lack support for any Windows target.
If you're inclined to fix that, it would be a great contribution. The more we
accrue tests before doing that, the harder it will be to dig out.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2015-03-11 05:52:48 Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2015-03-11 05:40:40 Re: moving from contrib to bin