From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Another reason why the recovery tests take a long time |
Date: | 2017-06-26 18:41:29 |
Message-ID: | CANP8+jKGLf199aWvs33qz=dZnJpQ_19ZcsZB4DMOsWuijM10jw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 26 June 2017 at 19:06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I wrote:
>> So this looks like a pretty obvious race condition in the postmaster,
>> which should be resolved by having it set a flag on receipt of
>> PMSIGNAL_START_WALRECEIVER that's cleared only when it does start a
>> new walreceiver.
>
> Concretely, I propose the attached patch. Together with reducing
> wal_retrieve_retry_interval to 500ms, which I propose having
> PostgresNode::init do in its standard postgresql.conf adjustments,
> this takes the runtime of the recovery TAP tests down from 2m50s
> (after the patches I posted yesterday) to 1m30s.
Patch looks good
> I think there's still gold to be mined, because "top" is still
> showing pretty low CPU load over most of the run, but this is
> lots better than 4m30s.
Thanks for looking into this
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-06-26 18:44:02 | Re: Timing-sensitive case in src/test/recovery TAP tests |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-06-26 18:06:56 | Re: Another reason why the recovery tests take a long time |