Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 12:01:27 -0700
From: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: robertmhaas@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
	9erthalion6@gmail.com, andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com,
	hlinnaka@iki.fi, michael@paquier.xyz
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?
Message-ID: <20200321190127.GA1763544@rfd.leadboat.com>
References: <20200227.160024.1603714516899165010.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
 <20200301195632.GA135286@rfd.leadboat.com>
 <20200302.165353.1408159864331844170.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
 <20200304.162919.898938381201316571.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
 <20200316034647.GA1121601@rfd.leadboat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200316034647.GA1121601@rfd.leadboat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 08:46:47PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 04:29:19PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > The attached is back-patches from 9.5 through master.
> 
> Thanks.  I've made some edits.  I'll plan to push the attached patches on
> Friday or Saturday.

Pushed, after adding a missing "break" to gist_identify() and tweaking two
more comments.  However, a diverse minority of buildfarm members are failing
like this, in most branches:

Mar 21 13:16:37 #   Failed test 'wal_level = minimal, SET TABLESPACE, hint bit'
Mar 21 13:16:37 #   at t/018_wal_optimize.pl line 231.
Mar 21 13:16:37 #          got: '1'
Mar 21 13:16:37 #     expected: '2'
Mar 21 13:16:46 # Looks like you failed 1 test of 34.
Mar 21 13:16:46 [13:16:46] t/018_wal_optimize.pl ................ 
  -- https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=crake&dt=2020-03-21%2016%3A52%3A05

Since I run two of the failing animals, I expect to reproduce this soon.

fairywren failed differently on 9.5; I have not yet studied it:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=fairywren&dt=2020-03-21%2018%3A01%3A10

> > It lacks a part of TAP infrastructure nowadays we have, but I
> > want to have the test (and it actually found a bug I made during this
> > work). So I added a patch to back-patch TestLib.pm, PostgresNode.pm
> > and RecursiveCopy.pm along with 018_wal_optimize.pl.
> > (0004-Add-TAP-test-for-WAL-skipping-feature.patch)
> 
> That is a good idea.  Rather than make it specific to this test, I would like
> to back-patch all applicable test files from 9.6 src/test/recovery.  I'll plan
> to push that one part on Thursday.

That push did not cause failures.