Re: Another reason why the recovery tests take a long time

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Another reason why the recovery tests take a long time
Date: 2017-06-26 18:41:29
Message-ID: CANP8+jKGLf199aWvs33qz=dZnJpQ_19ZcsZB4DMOsWuijM10jw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 26 June 2017 at 19:06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I wrote:
>> So this looks like a pretty obvious race condition in the postmaster,
>> which should be resolved by having it set a flag on receipt of
>> PMSIGNAL_START_WALRECEIVER that's cleared only when it does start a
>> new walreceiver.
>
> Concretely, I propose the attached patch. Together with reducing
> wal_retrieve_retry_interval to 500ms, which I propose having
> PostgresNode::init do in its standard postgresql.conf adjustments,
> this takes the runtime of the recovery TAP tests down from 2m50s
> (after the patches I posted yesterday) to 1m30s.

Patch looks good

> I think there's still gold to be mined, because "top" is still
> showing pretty low CPU load over most of the run, but this is
> lots better than 4m30s.

Thanks for looking into this

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-06-26 18:44:02 Re: Timing-sensitive case in src/test/recovery TAP tests
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-06-26 18:06:56 Re: Another reason why the recovery tests take a long time