Re: Test slots invalidations in 035_standby_logical_decoding.pl only if dead rows are removed

From: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Yu Shi (Fujitsu)" <shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Test slots invalidations in 035_standby_logical_decoding.pl only if dead rows are removed
Date: 2024-01-15 09:00:00
Message-ID: b641be2a-945b-999c-2828-7bbd8a16a009@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello Michael and Bertrand,

15.01.2024 06:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
> The WAL records related to standby snapshots are playing a lot with
> the randomness of the failures we are seeing. Alexander has mentioned
> offlist something else: using SIGSTOP on the bgwriter to avoid these
> records and make the test more stable. That would not be workable for
> Windows, but I could live with that knowing that logical decoding for
> standbys has no platform-speficic tweak for the code paths we're
> testing here, and that would put as limitation to skip the test for
> $windows_os.

I've found a way to implement pause/resume for Windows processed and it
looks acceptable to me if we can afford "use Win32::API;" on Windows
(maybe the test could be skipped only if this perl module is absent).
Please look at the PoC patch for the test 035_standby_logical_decoding.
(The patched test passes for me.)

If this approach looks promising to you, maybe we could add a submodule to
perl/PostgreSQL/Test/ and use this functionality in other tests (e.g., in
019_replslot_limit) as well.

Personally I think that having such a functionality for using in tests
might be useful not only to avoid some "problematic" behaviour but also to
test the opposite cases.

> While thinking about that, a second idea came into my mind: a
> superuser-settable developer GUC to disable such WAL records to be
> generated within certain areas of the test. This requires a small
> implementation, but nothing really huge, while being portable
> everywhere. And it is not the first time I've been annoyed with these
> records when wanting a predictible set of WAL records for some test
> case.

I see that the test in question exists in REL_16_STABLE, it means that a
new GUC would not help there?

Best regards,
Alexander

Attachment Content-Type Size
035-suspend-on-Windows.patch text/x-patch 3.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jelte Fennema-Nio 2024-01-15 09:01:59 Re: Add PQsendSyncMessage() to libpq
Previous Message Nazir Bilal Yavuz 2024-01-15 08:54:19 Re: Create shorthand for including all extra tests