Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test
Date: 2006-06-28 17:58:13
Message-ID: 28293.1151517493@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> If this were a significant risk wouldn't we have seen many such failures
> before now?

Hard to tell. It's possibly architecture-dependent, for one thing
(MAXALIGN will affect space availability). Since this happened in a
parallel regression run, it could also be a matter of timing relative to
the concurrent tests. I've often thought that we are not getting as much
mileage out of the parallel-testing facility as we could, because it's
really not exercising variations in timing all that much. It'd be
interesting to throw in a small random delay at the start of each member
of a concurrent set of tests.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-06-28 17:59:32 Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-06-28 17:56:09 Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test