| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Adding locks statistics |
| Date: | 2026-03-24 20:09:37 |
| Message-ID: | hlkdrplgrmudbspibsuq6xooxrqxqsgwo6x5b6x5ptvkgjbe7w@xogt6xgua6dz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2026-03-24 16:02:55 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Another thing I am not completely sure is if the sleep time of the
> isolation tests is long enough. I have tested things with
> CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS to make the setup more sensitive to timings but
> could not get it to fail. We'll know soon enough if the buildfarm
> complains.
>
> After a few more tweaks here and there (code, comments, some
> beautification), done.
The test is extremely unstable on windows. On CI 10/16 runs since the test in
failed due to it, afaict.
I don't see how a test with a timeout setting that's anywhere remotely close
to 10ms could be expected to be stable.
Also, anything that requires short sleeps (like pg_sleep(0.05);) is extremely
likely to be a long time test stability hazard. It's a huge "test smell" to
me, to the point that I think every single sleep in a test needs a comment
explaining why that one use of sleep is correct, and that comment better be
signed in blood.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cliff Clark | 2026-03-24 20:38:21 | [PATCH] Auto vacuum should still run when clock is set back |
| Previous Message | Thiago Caserta | 2026-03-24 19:59:51 | [PATCH v1] Fix typos in pg_bsd_indent: "dont" -> "don't" in comments Anexo: o arquivo |