Re: 011_crash_recovery.pl intermittently fails

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru
Cc: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, craig(dot)ringer(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: 011_crash_recovery.pl intermittently fails
Date: 2021-03-05 08:41:55
Message-ID: 20210305.174155.2066273010797082123.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At Fri, 5 Mar 2021 13:20:53 +0500, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> wrote in
> > 5 марта 2021 г., в 13:00, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> написал(а):
> >
> > The problem records have 15 pages of FPIs. The reduction of their
> > size may prevent WAL-buffer wrap around and wal writes. If no wal is
> > written the test fails.
> Thanks, I've finally understood the root cause.
> So, test verifies guarantee that is not provided (durability of aborted transactions)?

I think that's right.

> Maybe flip it to test that transaction effects are not committed\visible?

Maybe no. The objective of the test is to check if a maybe-comitted
transaction at crash is finally committed or aborted without directly
confirming the result data, I think. And that feature is found not to
be working as expected.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2021-03-05 08:46:04 Re: Is it useful to record whether plans are generic or custom?
Previous Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2021-03-05 08:37:22 Re: 011_crash_recovery.pl failes using wal_block_size=16K