Re: The real reason why TAP testing isn't ready for prime time

On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 6:53 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>>> On 2015-06-19 11:16:18 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>>> I wonder whether it's such a good idea for the postmaster to give
>>>>> up waiting before all children are gone (postmaster.c:1722 in HEAD).
>>
>>>> I doubt it.
>>
>>> Seconded. It's pretty bad to possibly not be able to start again after
>>> stopping it. I don't see the benefit in not waiting - sure, the
>>> poastmaster exits faster, but postgres hasn't shut down at that point...
>>
>> Yeah. I'll see about fixing this. Hard to be sure if it will fix
>> hamster's issue though.
>
> I have re-enabled the TAP tests in hamster. What happens in the next
> couple of days will be interesting to see.he perl

And, we get a failure:
http://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=hamster&dt=2015-06-20%2017%3A59%3A01
I am not sure why buildfarm runs makes it more easily reproducible,
one of the reasons may be the perl scripts run underground.
--
Michael