MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+E0NR4S+NC6+QHyY_vUuQZMzLhKqczMx-jJVqtjAxF6+=JwAA@mail.gmail.com>
 <94d53a41-d1f5-4fd1-8d1e-ff36ac569848@app.fastmail.com> <4DA5A159-39FD-47DB-95E5-A4F65BC5782A@yandex-team.ru>
 <53e96b5a-cc77-4afa-8103-79c69afef1a6@uni-muenster.de> <CA+E0NR4=J-pgqEAV2weymygGmk1ePym45m2AcGyi2hpa9xRvBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALdSSPiq+x9pRVYvYtddTQsL8=ZMvob+vSv5mHEXbe0aoPWGig@mail.gmail.com>
 <748a7ec0-9126-4f27-a2a7-e3e449d6fdd7@uni-muenster.de> <CA+E0NR6tnLDanSNwcqZM_-ReBXitAOFsoaBAZBqXYEx0Di+fwQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8a240667-de9e-455b-b3e2-62f34ec80154@uni-muenster.de> <CA+E0NR7=V57gVR_-CHs-0W0XL7UrKdyGfT=ZiQcuCdsDcjN94g@mail.gmail.com>
 <3f1b817f-6e7a-4e01-bfc5-50ea3724225e@uni-muenster.de> <CA+E0NR6MJfE8Hkk2Q-MgWUkk=Yy_4fWdiiaAKW_Ux_hcAAtAFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALdSSPhujM+mMH5CSFM+QYzAS5h=ga8-YDOcGN1LvOZPG4_RUg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALdSSPhujM+mMH5CSFM+QYzAS5h=ga8-YDOcGN1LvOZPG4_RUg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kirill Gavrilov <diphantxm@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2024 11:44:00 +0300
Message-ID: <CA+E0NR7xYFtHpfnySWrA+CLA8t2sWy4w3XQA7LRXPALZHWgYvg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Truncate logs by max_log_size
To: Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>
Cc: Jim Jones <jim.jones@uni-muenster.de>, "Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, 
	Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c3f3d006281d51a5"
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BE0NR7xYFtHpfnySWrA%2BCLA8t2sWy4w3XQA7LRXPALZHWgYvg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--000000000000c3f3d006281d51a5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

>
>
> Hi
>
> > +for (my $attempts = 0; $attempts < $max_attempts; $attempts++)
> > +{
> > + eval {
> > + $current_logfiles = slurp_file($node->data_dir . '/current_logfiles');
> > + };
> > + last unless $@;
> > + usleep(100_000);
> > +}
>
>
> `usleep` in tap tests is usually a bad pattern. Do we have a chance to
> test this using `wait_for_log` or similar?
>

I'm not sure we can use `wait_for_log` because it checks for only one
logfile. But even if it's possible, I don't think it's a good idea to use
different checks in the same file or to change tests for another feature. I
used test case from above as an example for mine.

--000000000000c3f3d006281d51a5
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><blockquo=
te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px =
solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>Hi<br>
<br>
&gt; +for (my $attempts =3D 0; $attempts &lt; $max_attempts; $attempts++)<b=
r>
&gt; +{<br>
&gt; + eval {<br>
&gt; + $current_logfiles =3D slurp_file($node-&gt;data_dir . &#39;/current_=
logfiles&#39;);<br>
&gt; + };<br>
&gt; + last unless $@;<br>
&gt; + usleep(100_000);<br>
&gt; +}<br>
<br>
<br>
`usleep` in tap tests is usually a bad pattern. Do we have a chance to<br>
test this using `wait_for_log` or similar?<br></blockquote><div>=C2=A0</div=
><div>I&#39;m not sure we can use `wait_for_log` because it checks for only=
 one logfile. But even if it&#39;s possible, I don&#39;t think it&#39;s a g=
ood idea to use different checks in the same file or to change tests for an=
other feature. I used test case from above as an example for mine.</div></d=
iv></div>

--000000000000c3f3d006281d51a5--