From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Smolkin Grigory <smallkeen(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: race condition in pg_class |
Date: | 2024-06-11 04:37:21 |
Message-ID: | ZmfUgRBbyLIGoHyM@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 07:19:27PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 09:08:03AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I think the core code should provide an "Injection Point" wait event
>> type and let extensions add specific wait events there, just like you
>> did for "Extension".
>
> Michael, could you accept the core code offering that, or not? If so, I am
> content to implement that. If not, for injection point wait events, I have
> just one priority. The isolation tester already detects lmgr locks without
> the test writer teaching it about each lock individually. I want it to have
> that same capability for injection points. Do you think we can find something
> everyone can accept, having that property? These wait events show up in tests
> only, and I'm happy to make the cosmetics be anything compatible with that
> detection ability.
Adding a wait event class for injection point is an interesting
suggestion that would simplify the detection in the isolation function
quite a bit. Are you sure that this is something that would be fit
for v17 material? TBH, I am not sure.
At the end, the test coverage has the highest priority and the bugs
you are addressing are complex enough that isolation tests of this
level are a necessity, so I don't object to what
inplace050-tests-inj-v2.patch introduces with the naming dependency
for the time being on HEAD. I'll just adapt and live with that
depending on what I deal with, while trying to improve HEAD later on.
I'm still wondering if there is something that could be more elegant
than a dedicated class for injection points, but I cannot think about
something that would be better for isolation tests on top of my head.
If there is something I can think of, I'll just go and implement it :)
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-06-11 04:52:28 | Re: Improve the granularity of PQsocketPoll's timeout parameter? |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-06-11 04:34:40 | Re: Improve the granularity of PQsocketPoll's timeout parameter? |