From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Can we automatically add elapsed times to tap test log? |
Date: | 2022-04-01 19:16:28 |
Message-ID: | 93f5ba58-c511-aade-eaf6-ae112c4fa44d@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/1/22 13:44, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:21:50AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> right now I am looking at a test added in the shmstats patch that's slow on
>> CI, on windows only. Unfortunately the regress_log_* output is useless as-is
>> to figure out where things hang.
>>
>> I've hit this several times before. Of course it's not too hard to hack up
>> something printing elapsed time. But ISTM that it'd be better if we were able
>> to prefix the logging into regress_log_* with something like
>> [timestamp + time since start of test]
>> or
>> [timestamp + time since start of test + time since last log message]
>>
>>
>> This isn't just useful to figure out what parts of test are slow, but also
>> helps correlate server logs with the regress_log_* output. Which right now is
>> hard and inaccurate, requiring manually correlating statements between server
>> log and the tap test (often there's no logging for statements in the
>> regress_log_*).
> +1
>
Maybe one way would be to make a change in
src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/SimpleTee.pm. The simplest thing would
just be to add a timestamp, the other things would involve a bit more
bookkeeping. It should also be checked to make sure it doesn't add too
much overhead, although I would be surprised if it did.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-04-01 19:29:33 | Re: Can we automatically add elapsed times to tap test log? |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-04-01 19:06:52 | Re: should vacuum's first heap pass be read-only? |