Re: Instability in select_parallel regression test

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Instability in select_parallel regression test
Date: 2017-02-27 02:37:41
Message-ID: CAA4eK1JcfTzpjqS+qhXdfjyg4Q1r3VFSAvK=eSW09if=PcuZUQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> The main point is if we
>> keep any loose end in this area, then there is a chance that the
>> regression test select_parallel can still fail, if not now, then in
>> future. Another way could be that we can try to minimize the race
>> condition here and then adjust the select_parallel as suggested above
>> so that we don't see this failure.
>
> My guess is that if we apply the fix I suggested above, it'll be good
> enough. If that turns out not to be true, then I guess we'll have to
> deal with that, but why not do the easy thing first?
>

Okay, that is also a sensible approach. Your patch looks good to me,
though I have not tested it.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2017-02-27 02:38:08 Re: dropping partitioned tables without CASCADE
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2017-02-27 02:28:08 Re: timeouts in PostgresNode::psql