|From:||Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>|
|To:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>|
|Cc:||Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr, thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com, m(dot)polyakova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru|
|Subject:||Re: [HACKERS] WIP aPatch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:26:54 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > The patch Pushed. Thank you!
> My hoary animal prairiedog doesn't like this :
> # Failed test 'concurrent update with retrying stderr /(?s-xim:client (0|1) got an error in command 3 \\(SQL\\) of script 0; ERROR: could not serialize access due to concurrent update\\b.*\\g1)/'
> # at t/001_pgbench_with_server.pl line 1229.
> # 'pgbench: pghost: /tmp/nhghgwAoki pgport: 58259 nclients: 2 nxacts: 1 dbName: postgres
> # pgbench: client 0 got an error in command 3 (SQL) of script 0; ERROR: could not serialize access due to concurrent update
> # '
> # doesn't match '(?s-xim:client (0|1) got an error in command 3 \\(SQL\\) of script 0; ERROR: could not serialize access due to concurrent update\\b.*\\g1)'
> # Looks like you failed 1 test of 425.
> I'm not sure what the "\\b.*\\g1" part of this regex is meant to
> accomplish, but it seems to be assuming more than it should
> about the output format of TAP messages.
I have edited the test code from the original patch by mistake, but
I could not realize because the test works in my machine without any
I attached a patch to fix the test as was in the original patch, where
backreferences are used to check retry of the same query.
Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
|Next Message||Amit Kapila||2022-03-24 02:58:25||Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication|
|Previous Message||Andy Fan||2022-03-24 02:21:41||Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?|