| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Clément Prévost <prevostclement(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered |
| Date: | 2016-08-17 12:50:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KcvkfT=jJ4=3vcJR-zfexNm5H2Fv+NQigidJgELnKOGA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:34 AM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 6/20/16 11:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> > I think this test would only fail if it runs out of workers, and that
>>> > would only happen in an installcheck run against a server configured in
>>> > a nonstandard way or that is doing something else -- which doesn't
>>> > happen on the buildfarm.
>> Um, if you're speaking of select_parallel, that already runs in parallel
>> with two other regression tests, and there is no annotation in the
>> parallel_schedule file suggesting that adding more scripts to that group
>> would be bad. But yes, perhaps putting this test into its own standalone
>> group would be enough of a fix.
>
> Maybe now would be a good time to address this by applying the attached
> patch to master and seeing what happens?
>
+1. Your patch looks good to me.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Anastasia Lubennikova | 2016-08-17 13:01:20 | Re: Pluggable storage |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-08-17 12:47:38 | drop src/backend/port/darwin/system.c ? |