Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues
Date: 2020-12-04 22:00:48
Message-ID: CAH2-Wz=9nLNtRWEaVGSEhA3ZoLy+5fdGFjqkVMTTUM9K5uz8YQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:20 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thank you for your feedback. We probably can't think over everything
> in advance. We can start with configure option enabled for developers
> and some buildfarm animals. That causes no risk of overhead in
> standard builds. After some time, we may reconsider to enable stop
> events even in standard build if we see they cause no regression.

I'll start using the configure option for debug builds only as soon as
possible. It will easily work with my existing workflow.

I don't know about anyone else, but for me this is only a very small
inconvenience. Whereas the convenience of not having to think about
the performance impact seems huge.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2020-12-04 22:01:38 Re: Removal of operator_precedence_warning
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2020-12-04 21:46:34 Re: A few new options for CHECKPOINT