| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG] Logical replica crash if there was an error in a function. |
| Date: | 2022-11-15 01:59:42 |
| Message-ID: | 992334.1668477582@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Anton A. Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru> writes:
> On 02.11.2022 21:02, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think the cost of that test case is justified by the tiny
>> probability that it'd ever catch anything.
> Seems it is possible to do a test without these remarks. The attached
> test uses existing nodes and checks the specific error message.
My opinion remains unchanged: this would be a very poor use of test
cycles.
> Additionally
> i've tried to reduce overall number of nodes previously
> used in this test in a similar way.
Optimizing existing tests isn't an answer to that. We could
install those optimizations without adding a new test case.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2022-11-15 02:04:28 | Re: List of Bitmapset (was Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions) |
| Previous Message | Anton A. Melnikov | 2022-11-15 01:39:53 | Re: [BUG] Logical replica crash if there was an error in a function. |