public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Xuneng Zhou <[email protected]>
To: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: test: avoid redundant standby catchup in 049_wait_for_lsn
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:19:50 +0800
Message-ID: <CABPTF7VouG5DSvdgPSg1ko6ybHhNPQk5sxJQMiy8r_gr_bEtug@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CABPTF7WZ1yuYz8V=xsbghg8e7qaAm5MpyNw6BthWcbN7+P6biw@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

Hi Michael,


On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 08:25:35PM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
> > The change preserves the same coverage while removing one redundant
> > replay catch-up on the delayed standby. It appears to reduce the test
> > runtime by about 7 seconds, though I have looked into why much of the
> > improvement comes from this change alone.
>
> Alexander may think differently and remove that, but I disagree.  The
> test is clearly written so as we want two wait checks to happen, for
> for CREATE FUNCTION, and one for CREATE PROCEDURE.  Removing the first
> check to keep only the second one removes its meaning.  In short, I
> see nothing wrong to deal with here.
>

Thank you for the review. I agree that the two wait checks serve distinct
purposes and are not redundant. The main motivation for this patch was
efficiency. In my testing, the new test added approximately 7 seconds to
the runtime, while the creation of the procedure and function completed
quickly. I suspect the latency stems from the wait-for-catch-up step. When
I removed it, the test runtime dropped by about 7 seconds.I haven't yet
investigated why the wait is so costly in this case. I should probably look
into that before proposing this change.

Best,
Xuneng

>

view thread (7+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

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: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: test: avoid redundant standby catchup in 049_wait_for_lsn
  In-Reply-To: <CABPTF7VouG5DSvdgPSg1ko6ybHhNPQk5sxJQMiy8r_gr_bEtug@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox