From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Adding a TAP test checking data consistency on standby with minRecoveryPoint |
Date: | 2018-11-08 07:00:26 |
Message-ID: | 20181108070026.GG1222@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 06:00:29AM +0000, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> I think it would be nice to have a test that didn't rely on that, too.
Yes, I don't disagree with you and I thought about it. Fetching the
value from the control file is easy, doing the comparison between two
LSNs is also simple by doing it directly with pg_lsn in the database
(and I don't want to add math logics about LSNs as a TAP API). Now I am
less sure about how portable it is possible to make the read of 8 bytes
on the page header for the last page of a relation portable across many
architectures in perl.
And I am not sure that we actually need this addition that as the
standby spawned in the TAP test will not have any clients scanning the
pages and generating WAL, except autovacuum which would be better
switched off in the test.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Naylor | 2018-11-08 07:02:24 | Re: PostgreSQL Limits and lack of documentation about them. |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2018-11-08 06:11:35 | Re: move PartitionBoundInfo creation code |