Re: postgres_fdw test timeouts

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw test timeouts
Date: 2023-12-07 23:02:15
Message-ID: 20231207230215.GA3359478@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 09:55:58AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Oh, wow. Nice detective work! Thank you for figuring that out.

+1

> Now we have the question of whether to go forwards (commit the "socket
> table" thing), or backwards (revert 04a09ee for now to clear the CI
> failures). I don't love the hidden complexity of the socket table and
> am not in a hurry to commit it, but I don't currently see another
> way... on the other hand we have other CI flapping due to that problem
> too so reverting 04a09ee would be sweeping problems under the carpet.
> I still need to process your feedback/discoveries on that other thread
> and it may take a few weeks for me to get to it.

I don't think we need to revert 04a09ee provided the issue is unrelated and
a fix is in development.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2023-12-07 23:12:51 micro-optimizing json.c
Previous Message Peter Smith 2023-12-07 22:58:52 Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby