From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: test/modules/test_oat_hooks vs. debug_discard_caches=1 |
Date: | 2022-11-19 14:33:22 |
Message-ID: | 2393660.1668868402@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On 11/19/22 14:51, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> On 2022-11-19 Sa 05:34, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>> I wonder if it'd make sense to have some simple & optional alerting
>>> based on how long ago the machine reported the last result. Send e-mail
>>> if there was no report for a month or so would be enough.
>> This has been part of the buildfarm for a very long time. See the alerts
>> section of the config file.
> I don't think alerting from the client would catch those cases, but
> maybe it's a rare issue and I'm overthinking it.
Those alerts are sent by the buildfarm server, not the client.
That has a failure mode of its own: if an animal goes down hard,
the server is left with its last-seen alert setup. The only
way to not get nagged permanently is to ask Andrew to intervene
manually. (Ask me how I know.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-11-19 15:30:40 | Re: test/modules/test_oat_hooks vs. debug_discard_caches=1 |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2022-11-19 14:07:45 | Re: test/modules/test_oat_hooks vs. debug_discard_caches=1 |