From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Adding a test for speculative insert abort case |
Date: | 2019-05-01 02:13:46 |
Message-ID: | CA+hUKGJBe0qModjjwWD07N61DYr49bAWxNusnJKX-2FqtSWe9Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 12:16 PM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> s1: insert into t1 values(1, 'someval') on conflict(id) do update set val = 'someotherval';
> s1: pause in ExecInsert before calling ExecInsertIndexTuples
> s2: insert into t1 values(1, 'someval');
> s2: continue
>
> We don't know of a way to add this scenario to the current isolation framework.
>
> Can anyone think of a good way to put this codepath under test?
Hi Melanie,
I think it'd be nice to have a set of macros that can create wait
points in the C code that isolation tests can control, in a special
build. Perhaps there could be shm hash table of named wait points in
shared memory; if DEBUG_WAIT_POINT("foo") finds that "foo" is not
present, it continues, but if it finds an entry it waits for it to go
away. Then isolation tests could add/remove names and signal a
condition variable to release waiters.
I contemplated that while working on SKIP LOCKED, which had a bunch of
weird edge cases that I tested by inserting throw-away wait-point code
like this:
--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2019-05-01 03:43:18 | Re: Unhappy about API changes in the no-fsm-for-small-rels patch |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-05-01 02:09:51 | Re: Adding a test for speculative insert abort case |