From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Why is src/test/modules/committs/t/002_standby.pl flaky? |
Date: | 2022-01-14 22:44:20 |
Message-ID: | 20220114224420.7kkorae3rxtx547n@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-01-15 10:59:00 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 9:28 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > I think it doesn't even need to touch socket.c to cause breakage. Using two
> > different WaitEventSets is enough.
>
> Right. I was interested in your observation because so far we'd
> *only* been considering the two-consecutive-WaitEventSets case, which
> we could grok experimentally.
There likely are further problems in other parts, but I think socket.c is
unlikely to be involved in walreceiver case - there shouldn't be any socket.c
style socket in walreceiver itself, nor do I think we are doing a
send/recv/select backed by socket.c.
> The patch Alexander tested most recently uses a tri-state eof flag [...]
What about instead giving WalReceiverConn an internal WaitEventSet, and using
that consistently? I've attached a draft for that.
Alexander, could you test with that patch applied?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-WIP-use-long-lived-WaitEventSet-for-libpqwalreceiver.patch | text/x-diff | 19.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-01-14 22:48:39 | Re: tab completion of enum values is broken |
Previous Message | Shawn Debnath | 2022-01-14 22:20:05 | Re: MultiXact\SLRU buffers configuration |