From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>
Cc: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: snapbuild woes
Date: Mon, 01 May 2017 12:32:07 -0400
Message-ID: <16845.1493656327@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170501160918.j27fvngzuwspg7d6@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <d6f4a15c-b95d-54b1-0b06-f24bcd0b6fcb@2ndquadrant.com>
<20170412172151.nauhiagitlpfxief@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20170413045812.GA2917375@tornado.leadboat.com>
<20170417020404.GB2988768@tornado.leadboat.com>
<20170418041657.hvwss6hz73ghozp5@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20170420000906.75t6uo7bof5pazrq@alap3.anarazel.de>
<ad637c84-534d-b291-9b6c-458f1ff7f54b@2ndquadrant.com>
<20170422053458.z7kmzopqdyi2tai4@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20170429214201.GB799290@rfd.leadboat.com>
<4387.1493642807@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20170501160918.j27fvngzuwspg7d6@alap3.anarazel.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2017-05-01 08:46:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> 30sec is kind of a big lump from a buildfarm standpoint, especially if
>> you mean "it runs for 30s on my honkin' fast workstation". I'm fine
>> with individual tests that run for ~ 1sec.
> I was more thinking of pgench -T$XX, rather than constant number of
> iterations. I currently can reproduce the issues within like 3-4
> minutes, so 5s is probably not quite sufficient to get decent coverage.
Adding a five-minute pgbench run to the buildfarm sequence is definitely
going to get you ridden out of town on a rail. But quite aside from the
question of whether we can afford the cycles, it seems like the wrong
approach. IMO the buildfarm is mainly for verifying portability, not for
trying to prove that race-like conditions don't exist. In most situations
we're going out of our way to ensure reproduceability of tests we add to
the buildfarm sequence; but it seems like this is looking for
irreproducible results.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, noah@leadboat.com, petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com, peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, er@xs4all.nl, david@pgmasters.net, robertmhaas@gmail.com, craig@2ndquadrant.com, pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: snapbuild woes
In-Reply-To: <16845.1493656327@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox