From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: isolation check takes a long time |
Date: | 2012-07-15 20:42:22 |
Message-ID: | CAD5tBcJ53KaefcFUv6y=7B1oSS=bMFyfej05xNEgR_U9ghwTNA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Andrew Dunstan's message of vie jul 13 16:05:37 -0400 2012:
> > Why does the isolation check take such a long time? On some of my slower
> > buildfarm members I am thinking of disabling it because it takes so
> > long. This single test typically takes longer than a full serial
> > standard regression test. Is there any way we could make it faster?
>
> I think the "prepared transactions" test is the one that takes the
> longest. Which is a shame when prepared xacts are not enabled, because
> all it does is throw millions of "prepared transactions are not enabled"
> errors. There is one other test that takes very long because it commits
> a large amount of transactions. I found it to be much faster if run
> with fsync disabled.
>
> Maybe it'd be a good idea to disable fsync on buildfarm runs, if we
> don't already do so?
>
I'm looking into that. But given that the default is to set
max_prepared_transactions to 0, shouldn't we just remove that test from the
normal installcheck schedule?
We could provide an alternative schedule that does include it.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mike Wilson | 2012-07-15 21:15:35 | Re: BUG #6733: All Tables Empty After pg_upgrade (PG 9.2.0 beta 2) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-15 20:14:41 | Re: elog/ereport noreturn decoration |