public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Bertrand Drouvot <[email protected]>
To: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Jeff Davis <[email protected]>
Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Adding locks statistics
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 03:15:19 +0000
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<hlkdrplgrmudbspibsuq6xooxrqxqsgwo6x5b6x5ptvkgjbe7w@xogt6xgua6dz>
	<[email protected]>

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 08:46:23AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 04:09:37PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > The test is extremely unstable on windows.  On CI 10/16 runs since the test in
> > failed due to it, afaict.

Thanks for the warning!

> I am not surprised by that.  Windows is good in catching race
> conditions.
> 
> > I don't see how a test with a timeout setting that's anywhere remotely close
> > to 10ms could be expected to be stable.
> 
> Well, the low value of deadlock_timeout is not the problem. 

Yeah, there are other tests making use of a 10ms deadlock timeout.

> This test would be better if rewritten as a TAP test, I guess, with a
> NOTICE injection point before the CheckDeadLock() call in ProcSleep()
> to make sure that the second session processes the deadlock timeout
> request while it is waiting on its lock to be acquired.  One trickier
> part is that we only care about the deadlock_timeout in s2, because we
> want to measure the wait it has waited until the lock could be
> acquired, meaning that we should make s1 use a large deadlock_timeout
> to avoid interferences with a global injpoint.
> 
> I don't have the credits to test that in the CI for this month,
> unfortunately, and this creates noise in the CI for the work of other
> folks in this release cycle, so I am going to remove this test for
> now.

Thanks for the test removal. I created an open item for v19 so that we
don't forget to re-add a new version of the tests. I'll work on it.

[1]: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_19_Open_Items

Regards,

-- 
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

view thread (46+ 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], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Adding locks statistics
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* 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