Received: from makus.postgresql.org (makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F28E1AB3538 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 03:00:58 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SrNJh-0006fz-F6 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 06:00:57 +0000 Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6I60hhn017695; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 02:00:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom Lane To: Craig Ringer cc: Robert Haas , Jeff Janes , pgsql-hackers , Daniel Farina , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Harold_A=2E_Gim=E9nez=22?= Subject: Re: Re: Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) In-reply-to: <50064251.5010908@ringerc.id.au> References: <4FFCCAC4.4030503@ringerc.id.au> <32078D4B40DD40ECB739D0ECD7D95996@gmail.com> <19949.1342376967@sss.pgh.pa.us> <9603.1342454919@sss.pgh.pa.us> <11952.1342456591@sss.pgh.pa.us> <13011.1342457859@sss.pgh.pa.us> <15955.1342466333@sss.pgh.pa.us> <9247.1342565810@sss.pgh.pa.us> <5005FF9F.4! 040706@ringerc.id.au> <11099.1342571512@sss.pgh.pa.us> <50064251.50! 10908@ringerc.id.au> Comments: In-reply-to Craig Ringer message dated "Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:57:53 +0800" Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 02:00:43 -0400 Message-ID: <17694.1342591243@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201207/783 X-Sequence-Number: 211466 Craig Ringer writes: > On 07/18/2012 08:31 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Not sure if we need a whole "farm", but certainly having at least one >> machine testing this sort of stuff on a regular basis would make me feel >> a lot better. > OK. That's something I can actually be useful for. > My current qemu/kvm test harness control code is in Python since that's > what all the other tooling for the project I was using it for is in. Is > it likely to be useful for me to adapt that code for use for a Pg > crash-test harness, or will you need a particular tool/language to be > used? If so, which/what? I'll do pretty much anything except Perl. I'll > have a result for you more quickly working in Python, though I'm happy > enough to write it in C (or Java, but I'm guessing that won't get any > enthusiasm around here). If we were talking about code that was going to end up in the PG distribution, I'd kind of want it to be in C or Perl, just to keep down the number of languages we're depending on. However, it's not obvious that a tool like this would ever go into our distribution. I'd suggest working with what you're comfortable with, and we can worry about translation when and if there's a reason to. regards, tom lane