| From: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |
| Date: | 2016-05-06 21:15:47 |
| Message-ID: | 572D0983.6030109@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/06/2016 02:12 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2016-05-06 14:10:04 -0700, Josh berkus wrote:
>> On 05/06/2016 02:08 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>>> It bothers me more than it probably should: Nobdy tests, reviews,
>>> whatever a complex patch with significant data-loss potential. But as
>>> soon somebody dares to mention an option name...
>>
>> Definitely more than it should, because it's gonna happen *every* time.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality
>
> Doesn't mean it should not be frowned upon.
Or made light of, hence my post. Personally I don't care what the
option is called, as long as we have docs for it.
For the serious testing, does anyone have a good technique for creating
loads which would stress-test vacuum freezing? It's hard for me to come
up with anything which wouldn't be very time-and-resource intensive
(like running at 10,000 TPS for a week).
--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2016-05-06 21:17:13 | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-05-06 21:12:54 | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |