Re: Timing-sensitive case in src/test/recovery TAP tests

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Timing-sensitive case in src/test/recovery TAP tests
Date: 2017-08-09 13:39:04
Message-ID: 22438.1502285944@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> I got the same thought, wondering as well if get_slot_xmins should be
>>> renamed check_slot_xmins with the is() tests moved inside it as well.
>>> Not sure if that's worth the API ugliness though.

>> Mmm, doesn't seem like that's worth doing, but I'm half tempted to merge
>> wait_slot_xmins into get_slot_xmins so you can't skip it ...

> Let's do that please. Merging both was my first feeling when
> refactoring this test upthread. Should I send a patch?

Sure, have at it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2017-08-09 13:39:21 Re: Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-08-09 13:35:15 Re: Parallel Append implementation