From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>
cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>,
        PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests
In-reply-to: <2E9D28A3-1B54-446B-AC12-3BF86A2B522A@enterprisedb.com>
References: <32A1FDD1-9C7B-43B1-B3EE-49198DD3F887@enterprisedb.com>
 <20210925052151.GA4082552@rfd.leadboat.com>
 <2E9D28A3-1B54-446B-AC12-3BF86A2B522A@enterprisedb.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>
	message dated "Sat, 25 Sep 2021 07:12:08 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2502589.1632579467.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2021 10:17:47 -0400
Message-ID: <2502590.1632579467@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2502590.1632579467%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> On Sep 24, 2021, at 10:21 PM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
>>> I would
>>> expect tests which fail under legal alternate GUC settings to be harde=
ned to
>>> explicitly set the GUCs as they need, rather than implicitly relying o=
n the
>>> defaults.

>> That is not the general practice in PostgreSQL tests today.  The buildf=
arm
>> exercises some settings, so we keep the tests clean for those.  Coping =
with
>> max_wal_size=3D2 that way sounds reasonable.  I'm undecided about the v=
alue of
>> hardening tests against all possible settings.

> Leaving the tests brittle wastes developer time.

Trying to make them proof against all possible settings would waste
a lot more time, though.

			regards, tom lane