Re: A note about debugging TAP failures

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: A note about debugging TAP failures
Date: 2017-04-23 16:13:57
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 02:05:13PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Agreed. If paths are reproducible and cleaned up on next run it's also
>> much less of an issue to just leave them around till the next run.
>> Which we imo also should do for non-failing tmp_check directories.

> In general yes, but I think it should be checked what the overall
> storage requirements will be if one set of all data directories is kept
> around.

> I was surprised the src/bin/pg_basebackup/t TAP tests took up several
> hundred megabytes (IIRC) when I ran them, so if other tests are similar,
> it might make a few animals run out of diskspace as soon as this is
> deployed without a heads-up to the operators.

src/test/recovery/ alone eats 2.6GB if one sets CLEANUP => 0 as I did
upthread. So I think leaving them there by default is a nonstarter.
It might be okay to leave failed tests' dirs in place, but even there,
I'd personally prefer a manual control knob.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-04-23 16:17:12 Re: StandbyRecoverPreparedTransactions recovers subtrans links incorrectly
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-04-23 15:50:55 Re: Removing select(2) based latch (was Unportable implementation of background worker start)