Re: injection_points: Switch wait/wakeup to use atomics rather than latches

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Subject: Re: injection_points: Switch wait/wakeup to use atomics rather than latches
Date: 2026-06-02 05:27:32
Message-ID: ah5pxKkhEGW3QGH5@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 02, 2026 at 10:13:01AM +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> In a research test? sleep(1)

A hardcoded sleep can work on a fast machine but it makes the test
slow. A sleep is not a reliable technique if running the tests on a
slow machine, as an expected wait point may not have been reached. We
have both very slow and very fast animals in the buildfarm.

Rewording my question a bit: did you consider some options regarding
what an equivalent of a wait event lookup should look like when we
don't have a PGPROC? My idea of printing a LOG and do a server log
lookup would work, just asking if others have better ideas than the
only one I got.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2026-06-02 05:29:18 Re: pg_rewind does not rewind diverging timelines
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2026-06-02 05:23:56 Re: Row pattern recognition