From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2021 11:43:16 -0400
Message-ID: <2515244.1632584596@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2B4C64CF-EE3F-474B-9685-6A927E5E49AE@enterprisedb.com>
References: <32A1FDD1-9C7B-43B1-B3EE-49198DD3F887@enterprisedb.com>
<20210925052151.GA4082552@rfd.leadboat.com>
<2E9D28A3-1B54-446B-AC12-3BF86A2B522A@enterprisedb.com>
<2502590.1632579467@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<2B4C64CF-EE3F-474B-9685-6A927E5E49AE@enterprisedb.com>
Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> You may be right, but the conversation about "all possible settings" was started by Noah. I was really just talking about tests that depend on wal files not being removed, but taking no action to guarantee that, merely trusting that under default settings they won't be. I can't square that design against other TAP tests that do take measures to prevent wal files being removed. Why is the precaution taken in some tests but not others?
If we are doing something about that in some test cases, I'd agree with
doing the same thing in others that need it. It seems more likely to
be an oversight than an intentional test condition.
regards, tom lane
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, mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com, noah@leadboat.com
Subject: Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests
In-Reply-To: <2515244.1632584596@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