From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Parameter toast_tuple_target controls TOAST for new rows |
Date: | 2017-11-20 01:13:56 |
Message-ID: | CANP8+jLV34-6G3dxZMueQ30U_azJK1H8uHvk+85f2VCujVeJCQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers |
On 19 November 2017 at 19:49, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> On 2017-11-19 19:08:48 -0500, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> Am investigating the few buildfarm failures
>
>> The tests look very sensitive to differences in tuple size due to
>> different alignment requirements. Dependant on what MAXALIGN (and some
>> others) is the number of tuples fitting on a page will differ.
>
> "Few" buildfarm failures? It's probably going to fail on every 32-bit host.
>
> TBH, I would just remove those test cases. Even if they were stable
> across platforms, they don't directly prove anything at all about
> whether the feature does what it's supposed to.
>
> (Also, scaling the results to blocksize seems unlikely to help in
> passing on different BLCKSZ configurations...)
I just committed a change while this email arrived. I think what I've
done is essentially this.
The original test was more about demonstrating effectiveness.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-11-20 01:30:45 | Re: pgsql: Parameter toast_tuple_target controls TOAST for new rows |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2017-11-20 01:11:10 | pgsql: Reduce test variability for toast_tuple_target test |