| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences |
| Date: | 2022-03-09 11:41:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1Kfuf-AGsAWO-DUYjbhrvP2uOb-_U4BB1L-idW0eQyx3g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 4:14 AM Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 3/7/22 22:11, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >
> > I've pushed this simple fix. Not sure it'll fix the assert failures on
> > skink/locust, though. Given the lack of information it'll be difficult
> > to verify. So let's wait a bit.
> >
>
> I've done about 5000 runs of 'make check' in test_decoding, on two rpi
> machines (one armv7, one aarch64). Not a single assert failure :-(
>
> How come skink/locust hit that in just a couple runs?
>
Is it failed after you pushed a fix? I don't think so or am I missing
something? I feel even if doesn't occur again it would have been
better if we had some theory on how it occurred in the first place
because that would make us feel more confident that we won't have any
related problem left.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-03-09 12:37:23 | Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson -v6 |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2022-03-09 11:40:16 | Re: Reducing power consumption on idle servers |