From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
        Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
        Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: CI slowdown due to PG_TEST_INITDB_EXTRA_OPTS
In-reply-to: <r75blb6gfaqplk7jvwdjz5sjxryl73y2t2ih2lja6ptwb6ujbh@k3jyvsdd6way>
References: <r75blb6gfaqplk7jvwdjz5sjxryl73y2t2ih2lja6ptwb6ujbh@k3jyvsdd6way>
Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
	message dated "Sat, 18 Jul 2026 12:38:33 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <301015.1784400463.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2026 14:47:43 -0400
Message-ID: <301016.1784400463@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/301016.1784400463%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> I was once more wondering why CI is so slow. While thinking about what
> measurements to take, I think I figured out a major source:
> Many of the jobs use PG_TEST_INITDB_EXTRA_OPTS. Unfortunately, using that
> turns out to disable the initdb template mechanism:
> ...
> Any better ideas?

It looks like any one job mostly uses the same value of
PG_TEST_INITDB_EXTRA_OPTS.  Could we record what was used to set up
the template, and allow using it if that matches?

			regards, tom lane