From: | Matt Miller <mattm(at)epx(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Testing of MVCC |
Date: | 2005-08-11 14:21:19 |
Message-ID: | 1123770079.3638.21.camel@dbamm01-linux |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 16:41 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matt Miller <mattm(at)epx(dot)com> writes:
> > It seems to me that contrib/dblink could greatly simplify the design and
> > coding of multi-user regression tests.
>
> I doubt it would be very useful, since
> a script based on that still doesn't let you issue concurrent queries.
I think it would be useful to allow a test script to first create a set
of committed and uncommitted transactions, and to then issue some
queries on another connection to confirm that the other connection has a
proper view of the database at that point. This type of test is
serialized, but I think it would be a useful multi-user test. Also, the
output from such a test is probably pretty easy to fit into the
diff-based validation of "make check."
I realize that we also need to have tests that spawn several connections
and run scripts concurrently across those connections. I agree that
this type of test would probably not benefit fundamentally from
contrib/dblink. However, I was grasping a bit to see how the output
from such a concurrent test would be diff'ed with an expected output in
a meaningful way. So, to continue to progress on this problem, I
figured that a contrib/dblink dependency would at least allow me to
start coding something...
> > Is there objection to a portion
> > of src/test/regress depending on contrib/dblink?
>
> Yes.
Understood.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-08-11 14:43:04 | Re: Exceptions in PL/Perl? |
Previous Message | Jeff Boes | 2005-08-11 14:15:11 | Exceptions in PL/Perl? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matt Miller | 2005-08-11 15:04:36 | Re: PL/pgSQL: #option select_into_1_row (was SELECT INTO |
Previous Message | Ian Westmacott | 2005-08-11 13:26:37 | Re: Planner doesn't look at LIMIT? |