Re: isolation check takes a long time

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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