From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: interrupted tap tests leave postgres instances around |
Date: | 2022-10-18 10:15:11 |
Message-ID: | 20221018101511.ctzqz2hmj6u5coz5@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-Oct-01, Andres Freund wrote:
> Perhaps the END{} routine should call $node->_update_pid(-1); if $exit_code !=
> 0 and _pid is undefined?
Yeah, that sounds reasonable.
> That does seem to reduce the incidence of "leftover" postgres
> instances. 001_start_stop.pl leaves some behind, but that makes sense, because
> it's bypassing the whole node management. But I still occasionally see some
> remaining processes if I crank up test concurrency.
>
> Ah! At least part of the problem is that sub stop() does BAIL_OUT, and of
> course it can fail as part of the shutdown.
I made teardown_node pass down fail_ok=>1 to avoid this problem, so we
no longer BAIL_OUT in that case.
> But there's still some that survive, where your perl.trace doesn't contain the
> node getting shut down...
Yeah, something's still unexplained. I'll get this pushed soon, which
already reduces the number of leftover instances a good amount.
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-Better-handle-interrupting-TAP-tests.patch | text/x-diff | 1.9 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2022-10-18 10:18:25 | Re: Exponentiation confusion |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-10-18 09:56:51 | Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |