| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Continuing instability in insert-conflict-specconflict test |
| Date: | 2021-06-13 23:49:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20210613234904.7teqi22krf5xraxv@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2021-06-13 15:22:12 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 06:09:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > We might be able to get rid of the stuff about concurrent step
> > completion in isolationtester.c if we required the spec files
> > to use annotations to force a deterministic step completion
> > order in all such cases.
>
> Yeah. If we're willing to task spec authors with that, the test program can't
> then guess wrong under unusual timing.
I think it'd make it *easier* for spec authors. Right now one needs to
find some way to get a consistent ordering, which is often hard and
complicates tests way more than specifying an explicit ordering
would. And it's often unreliable, as evidenced here and in plenty other
tests.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gavin Flower | 2021-06-14 00:23:24 | Re: Continuing instability in insert-conflict-specconflict test |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2021-06-13 22:22:12 | Re: Continuing instability in insert-conflict-specconflict test |