From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | subscription/026_stats test is intermittently slow? |
Date: | 2024-04-19 17:57:41 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZkj=A39i4obKXADMhzJW=6dyGq-C1aGfb+jUy9XvxwYA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I just did a run of the regression test where this test was the last
one to finish by quite a lot. Key log entries:
[13:35:48.583](0.039s) # initializing database system by copying initdb template
...
[13:35:52.397](0.108s) ok 5 - Check reset timestamp for
'test_tab1_sub' is newer after second reset.
#### Begin standard error
psql:<stdin>:1: NOTICE: created replication slot "test_tab2_sub" on publisher
#### End standard error
Waiting for replication conn test_tab2_sub's replay_lsn to pass
0/151E8C8 on publisher
done
[13:38:53.706](181.310s) ok 6 - Check that table 'test_tab2' now has 1 row.
...
[13:38:54.344](0.294s) 1..13
I reran the test and it looks very different:
[13:54:01.703](0.090s) ok 5 - Check reset timestamp for
'test_tab1_sub' is newer after second reset.
...
Waiting for replication conn test_tab2_sub's replay_lsn to pass
0/151E900 on publisher
...
[13:54:03.006](1.303s) ok 6 - Check that table 'test_tab2' now has 1 row.
It looks to me like in the first run it took 3 minutes for the
replay_lsn to catch up to the desired value, and in the second run,
two seconds. I think I have seen previous instances where something
similar happened, although in those cases I did not stop to record any
details. Have others seen this? Is there something we can/should do
about it?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2024-04-19 18:04:40 | Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-04-19 17:36:34 | Re: Support event trigger for logoff |