| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: reducing isolation tests runtime |
| Date: | 2018-12-04 20:45:39 |
| Message-ID: | 28069.1543956339@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> I'd like to see this revived, getting a bit tired waiting longer and
> longer to see isolationtester complete. Is it really a problem that we
> require a certain number of connections? Something on the order of 30-50
> connections ought not to be a real problem for realistic machines, and
> if it's a problem for one, they can use a serialized schedule?
The longstanding convention in the main regression tests is 20 max.
Is there a reason to be different here?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-12-04 20:50:06 | Re: reducing isolation tests runtime |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-12-04 20:17:55 | Re: reducing isolation tests runtime |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-12-04 20:50:06 | Re: reducing isolation tests runtime |
| Previous Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2018-12-04 20:40:40 | Re: Use durable_unlink for .ready and .done files for WAL segment removal |