Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d5AjI-0006iO-G4 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 01 May 2017 12:47:04 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d5AjH-0004Wb-UR for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 01 May 2017 12:47:03 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d5AjG-0004VU-Qp; Mon, 01 May 2017 12:47:02 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d5Aj9-0002VA-JE; Mon, 01 May 2017 12:47:02 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v41CklEN004388; Mon, 1 May 2017 08:46:47 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Noah Misch cc: Andres Freund , Petr Jelinek , Peter Eisentraut , Erik Rijkers , David Steele , PostgreSQL-development , Robert Haas , Craig Ringer , pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Subject: Re: snapbuild woes In-reply-to: <20170429214201.GB799290@rfd.leadboat.com> References: <20170408143059.nrzuwyvv5apnhhta@alap3.anarazel.de> <20170412063142.GC2870454@tornado.leadboat.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> <20170422053458.z7kmzopqdyi2tai4@alap3.anarazel.de> <20170429214201.GB799290@rfd.leadboat.com> Comments: In-reply-to Noah Misch message dated "Sat, 29 Apr 2017 14:42:01 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <4386.1493642807.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 01 May 2017 08:46:47 -0400 Message-ID: <4387.1493642807@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Noah Misch writes: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:34:58PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: >> ... I was wondering about adding >> a loop that simply runs for like 30s and then quits or such, but who >> knows. > If the probabilistic test catches the bug even 5% of the time in typical > configurations, the buildfarm will rapidly identify any regression. I'd > choose a 7s test that detects the bug 5% of the time over a 30s test that > detects it 99% of the time. (When I wrote src/bin/pgbench/t/001_pgbench.pl > for a probabilistic bug, I sized that test to finish in 1s and catch its bug > half the time. In its case, only two buildfarm members were able to > demonstrate the original bug, so 5% detection would have been too low.) 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. (This is top-of-mind for me right now because I've been looking around for ways to speed up the regression tests.) 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