Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dPYzY-0000kk-VO for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 18:44:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dPYzY-0003gE-I1 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 18:44:08 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dPYzX-0003b0-08 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 18:44:07 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dPYzU-0002PI-IE for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 18:44:05 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v5QIi2nC014062; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 14:44:02 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Michael Paquier cc: Craig Ringer , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: Timing-sensitive case in src/test/recovery TAP tests In-reply-to: References: <8962.1498425057@sss.pgh.pa.us> <17089.1498442945@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Michael Paquier message dated "Mon, 26 Jun 2017 14:20:54 +0900" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <14060.1498502642.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 14:44:02 -0400 Message-ID: <14061.1498502642@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Michael Paquier writes: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Craig Ringer wr= ote: >> I'm not sure I understand this. > The patch attached may explain that better. Your patch added 3 poll > phases. I think that a 4th is needed. At the same time I have found > cleaner to put the poll calls into a small wrapper. Looks good as far as it goes, but I wonder whether any of the other get_slot_xmins calls need polling too. Don't feel a need to add such calls until someone exhibits a failure there, but I won't be very surprised if someone does. Anyway, pushed this patch with minor editing. Thanks! regards, tom lane --=20 Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers