Re: Making background psql nicer to use in tap tests

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, mikael(dot)kjellstrom(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: Making background psql nicer to use in tap tests
Date: 2023-04-08 00:02:18
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2023-04-07 Fr 19:14, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 8 Apr 2023, at 00:59, Daniel Gustafsson<daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
>>> On 8 Apr 2023, at 00:35, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Daniel Gustafsson<daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
>>>>> On 7 Apr 2023, at 23:01, Daniel Gustafsson<daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
>>>> Staring at this I've been unable to figure out if there an underlying problem
>>>> here or a flaky testrun, since I can't reproduce it. Maybe the animal owner
>>>> (on cc) have any insights?
>>>> The test has passed on several different platforms in the buildfarm, including
>>>> Linux, Solaris, macOS, NetBSD, FreeBSD and other OpenBSD animals. It also
>>>> passed in an OpenBSD VM running with our Cirrus framework.
>>> prion and mantid have now failed with the same symptom. I don't
>>> see a pattern, but it's not OpenBSD-only. It will be interesting
>>> to see if the failure is intermittent or not on those animals.
> morepork has failed again, which is good, since intermittent failures are
> harder to track down.
>> It would be interesting to know how far in the pumped input they get, if they
>> time out on the first one with nothing going through? Will investigate further
>> tomorrow to see.
> Actually, one quick datapoint. prion and mantid report running IPC::Run
> version 0.92, and morepork 0.96. Animals that pass are running 20180523.0,
> 20200505.0, 20220807.0 or similar versions. We don't print the IO::Pty version
> during configure, but maybe this is related to older versions of the modules
> and this test (not all of them apparently) need to SKIP if IO::Pty is missing
> or too old? Somewhere to start looking at the very least.

Those aren't CPAN version numbers. See <>

prion was running 1.10 (dated to 2010). I have just updated it to 1.17
(the CPAN latest). We'll see if that makes a difference.



Andrew Dunstan

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2023-04-08 00:05:10 Re: Is RecoveryConflictInterrupt() entirely safe in a signal handler?
Previous Message Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais 2023-04-08 00:01:19 Re: Memory leak from ExecutorState context?