| From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Viktor Holmberg <v(at)viktorh(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
| Subject: | Re: ON CONFLICT DO SELECT (take 3) |
| Date: | 2025-11-25 10:04:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAEZATCXboUd3HTOph4Ae5kJ=My_Vc2t2re5TuuunRBkOW55Lgw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 at 08:33, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> v16-0002: using INJECTION_POINT to test the case when
> ExecOnConflictSelect->ExecOnConflictLockRow returns false.
>
In general, having more tests is a good thing, but I think this is
setting a higher bar for the ON CONFLICT DO SELECT than existing code,
such as ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE. ExecOnConflictUpdate() also uses
ExecOnConflictLockRow() in the same way, and doesn't have such a test,
and there are other lock-and-retry paths in the executor not tested in
this way.
IMO, using injection points for testing a wider variety of possible
race conditions in the executor should be considered as a separate
patch.
Regards,
Dean
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-11-25 10:06:09 | Re: Extended Statistics set/restore/clear functions. |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2025-11-25 09:57:39 | Re: IPC/MultixactCreation on the Standby server |