| From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes |
| Date: | 2016-02-18 08:35:26 |
| Message-ID: | 56C5824E.9090400@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016/02/18 16:38, Craig Ringer wrote:
> I should resurrect Abhijit's patch to allow the isolationtester to talk to
> multiple servers. We'll want that when we're doing tests like "assert that
> this change isn't visible on the replica before it becomes visible on the
> master". (Well, except we violate that one with our funky
> synchronous_commit implementation...)
How much does (or does not) that overlap with the recovery test suite work
undertaken by Michael et al? I saw some talk of testing for patches in
works on the N synchronous standbys thread.
Thanks,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2016-02-18 08:45:17 | Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table. |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-02-18 08:33:13 | Re: pg_ctl promote wait |