Re: A test for replay of regression tests

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Anastasia Lubennikova <lubennikovaav(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: A test for replay of regression tests
Date: 2022-01-27 22:59:26
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2022-01-27 14:36:32 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On my windows test instance where I noticed this (w10,
> > msys2/ucrt), check took 516s and this test took 685s.
> Hm. That's both excruciatingly slow. Way way slower than what I see here, also
> w10, msys2/ucrt. Any chance the test instance has windows defender running,
> without a directory exclusion? I saw that trash performance to a near
> standstill.

Could you post the regression test output with the timings? Unless it's AV, I
don't see why a windows VM with a moderate amount of memory should take that

Do the test times get less bad if you use PG_TEST_USE_UNIX_SOCKETS=1
PG_REGRESS_SOCK_DIR: "c:/some-dir/"?

I see there's reports that the connection-timeout problem can be a lot worse
on windows, because several applications, e.g. docker, add additional names
for localhost. Are there any non-commented entries in

> Does it get better with the attached patch?

I pushed something like it now - seemed to be no reason to wait, given it
makes think less slow on my VM.


Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-01-27 23:03:57 Re: A test for replay of regression tests
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-01-27 22:53:02 Re: Replace uses of deprecated Python module distutils.sysconfig