From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: s_lock_test no longer works |
Date: | 2024-01-24 20:43:01 |
Message-ID: | 20240124204301.fgbemba4cb22mcrl@awork3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2024-01-24 15:05:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > On 2024-01-24 12:14:17 +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I do wonder if we want to keep this around, given that it's been more
> >> than one year broken and nobody seems to have noticed, and the Meson
> >> build does not support the test as a target.
>
> > Perhaps we should just make the test built and run by default instead? OTOH,
> > regress.c:test_spinlock() actually covers about as much as the standalone
> > test...
>
> If your spinlocks aren't working, it's unlikely you'll get as far as
> being able to run test_spinlock(). I think the standalone test does
> have some value; it's just that it's not needed very often these days.
As long as the uncontended case works, you can get surprisingly far... But
still, fair enough. If so, I think we should just rig things so the standalone
test gets built and run by default. It's not like that'd be a measurably
expensive thing to do.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Noah Misch | 2024-01-24 20:45:32 | Re: dblink query interruptibility |
Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2024-01-24 20:20:28 | Re: index prefetching |