Re: Add an optional timeout clause to isolationtester step.

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add an optional timeout clause to isolationtester step.
Date: 2020-03-10 02:14:59
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 03:15:58PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2020-03-07 22:17:09 +0100, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>> For reindex concurrently, a SELECT FOR UPDATE on a different connection can
>> ensure that the reindex will be stuck at some point, so canceling the command
>> after a long enough timeout reproduces the original faulty behavior.
> That kind of thing can already be done using statement_timeout or
> lock_timeout, no?

Yep, still that's not something I would recommend to commit in the
tree as that's a double-edged sword as you already know. For slower
machines, you need a statement_timeout large enough so as you make
sure that the state you want the query to wait for is reached, which
has a cost on all other faster machines as it makes the tests slower.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2020-03-10 02:23:13 Re: Proposal: Add more compile-time asserts to expose inconsistencies.
Previous Message James Coleman 2020-03-10 02:05:16 Re: Nicer error when connecting to standby with hot_standby=off