Re: Going for "all green" buildfarm results

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Going for "all green" buildfarm results
Date: 2006-07-31 20:31:58
Message-ID: 20060731203158.GI20962@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> > How sure are we that this is the cause of the problem? The feeling I got
> > was "this is a good guess". If so, do we want to prevent ourselves
> > getting any further clues in case we're wrong? It's also an interesting
> > case of a (low likelihood) bug which is not fixable on any stable branch.
>
> well I have a lot of trust into tom - though the main issue is that this
> issue seems to be difficult hard to trigger.
> afaik only one box (lionfish) ever managed to hit it and even there only
> 2 times out of several hundred builds - I don't suppose we can come up
> with a testcase that might be more reliably showing that issue ?

Maybe we could write a suitable test case using Martijn's concurrent
testing framework. Or with a pair of custom SQL script running under
pgbench, and a separate process sending random SIGSTOP/SIGCONT to
backends.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-07-31 20:36:11 Re: [PATCHES] extension for sql update
Previous Message Stefan Kaltenbrunner 2006-07-31 20:28:48 Re: Going for "all green" buildfarm results