From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: waiting for reload in tests |
Date: | 2022-05-10 01:52:51 |
Message-ID: | 20220510015251.ye76w5amkb25f2vi@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-05-09 21:42:20 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> > On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 09:29:32PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Less brute force: wait for "SHOW variable-you-changed" to report the
> >> value you expect.
>
> > This method may still be unreliable in some processes like a logirep
> > launcher/receiver or just autovacuum, no?
Yept, that's the problem. In my case it's the startup process...
> Yeah, if your test case requires knowing that some background process
> has gotten the word, it's a *lot* harder. I think we'd have to add a
> last-config-update-time column in pg_stat_activity or something like that.
That's basically what I was referencing with global barriers...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2022-05-10 02:06:08 | Re: 2022-05-12 release announcement draft |
Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2022-05-10 01:51:46 | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |