Re: A test for replay of regression tests

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, 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: 2022-02-02 01:14:02
Message-ID: 20220202011402.e7t3hu3jusalr32h@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2022-02-02 13:59:56 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Seen again today on prairiedog. Erm, scratch that idea, HS feedback
> interferes with test results.

It'd not be sufficient anyway, I think. E.g. autovacuum truncating a table
would not be prevented by hs_f I think?

> I guess max_standby_streaming_delay
> should be increased to 'forever', like in the attached

Seems reasonable.

> , since pg_dump runs for a very long time on prairiedog:

> 2022-02-01 04:47:59.294 EST [3670:15] 027_stream_regress.pl LOG:
> statement: SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL REPEATABLE READ, READ ONLY
> ...
> 2022-02-01 04:49:09.881 EST [3683:2585] 027_stream_regress.pl ERROR:
> canceling statement due to conflict with recovery

That, uh, seems slow. Is it perhaps waiting for a lock? Seems
Cluster.pm::init() should add at least log_lock_waits...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2022-02-02 01:35:02 Re: A test for replay of regression tests
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2022-02-02 00:59:56 Re: A test for replay of regression tests