From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>,
        Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
        Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>,
        Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>,
        PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations
In-reply-to: <b5ec84db-c5af-bfac-fe4f-a704a364f90b@dunslane.net>
References: <17212-34dd4a1d6bba98bf@postgresql.org>
 <CA+TgmoYa5exExaONEnGBWRdi7A3=FKuKzewY8DXTj6+045wiFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2-WzkwRUayddmb3uxCadV_y--DHfY+UMmjtOokiAO2xNh5fA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Tgmoat1M4MAqUQM1H+bkWR=wXmi33bB0YRR=xaFk9ADs5Jeg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2-Wzk3NzXYXsUKWBFuBm6aiXTh-_L2Dm9wPqfFenUvG+VbRw@mail.gmail.com>
 <543F3BF3-EDED-4C52-AF05-623921B6C409@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-WzkXphRHgbaUXqMgb7SBmc_VbwdyWGYqphV6KbOH7stfxA@mail.gmail.com>
 <55A2BFE7-AAAF-4A64-BD3A-5C98EA982267@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-WzniogVqNuWzNVLOKjkd8FBcSry29hN9=wiROUPw92fmGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <07159C9A-40DA-47BF-B2F4-! 203F5AC00890@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-Wzkt-umhXfR1nqy=ZDXMfoN3LDK4W5VtchfWyRAuPWxtnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <40DB088B-C96F-49B2-BC84-BDC8D35C7E97@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-Wzne7L9fX2LdZ9enNZpO2wuqbrsubCw2thH__CC_nZazjw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0B7DA7A4-2872-485B-BFDD-BF8E9BB07B26@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-Wz=YnyANaKQDfx9pg0YNPS-LY66CXQrUzED4Rgm
 <726473.1634184950@sss.pgh.pa.us> <b5ec84db-c5af-bfac-fe4!
 f-a704a364f90b@dunslane.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
	message dated "Thu, 14 Oct 2021 16:50:51 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <903460.1634245763.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 17:09:23 -0400
Message-ID: <903461.1634245763@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/903461.1634245763%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 10/14/21 12:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Looks like a transient/phase of the moon issue to me.

> Bowerbird is having similar issues, so I don't think this is just a
> transient.

Yeah, I noticed that too today, and poked around a bit.  But I don't
see what this test is doing differently from other tests that
bowerbird is running successfully.  It's failing while trying to crank
up a replica using init_from_backup, which has lots of precedent.

I do see that bowerbird is skipping some comparable tests due
to using "--skip-steps misc-check".  But it's not skipping,
eg, pg_rewind's 008_min_recovery_point.pl; and the setup steps
in that sure look just the same.  What's different?

(BTW, I wondered if PostgresNode->new's own_host hack could fix this.
But AFAICS that's dead code, with no existing test using it.  Seems
like we should nuke it.)

			regards, tom lane