Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Date: 2010-08-11 15:51:06
Message-ID: 4C62809A02000025000344D0@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On ons, 2010-08-11 at 09:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, I don't know why anyone would think that "a random number"
>> would offer any advantage here. I'd use the postmaster PID,
>> which is guaranteed to be unique across the space that you're
>> worried about. In fact, you could implement this off the
>> existing postmaster.pid, no need for any new file. What's
>> lacking is the pg_ping protocol.
>
> Why not just compare pg_backend_pid() with postmaster.pid?

See the prior discussion in the archives. We started with that and
found problems, to which Tom suggested a random number as the best
solution. Let's at least start any further discussion informed by
what's gone before; if there was a flaw in the reasoning, please
point that out.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-08-11 15:53:22 Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-08-11 15:49:43 Re: assertions and constraint triggers