RE: Stronger safeguard for archive recovery not to miss data

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
> I didn't see that, but found the following article.
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2590794/gcov-warning-merge-mismat
> ch-for-summaries
...
> It seems like your working directory needs some cleanup.

That could very well be. It'd be safer to run "make coverage-clean" between builds.

I thought otherwise that the multiple TAP tests that were simultaneously run conflicted on the .gcda file. If this is the case, we may not be able to eliminate the failure possibility. (make -J 1 circumvents this?)

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/install-procedure.html

"If using GCC, all programs and libraries are compiled with code coverage testing instrumentation."

33.4. TAP Tests
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/regress-tap.html

"Generically speaking, the TAP tests will test the executables in a previously-installed installation tree if you say make installcheck, or will build a new local installation tree from current sources if you say make check. In either case they will initialize a local instance (data directory) and transiently run a server in it. Some of these tests run more than one server."

"It's important to realize that the TAP tests will start test server(s) even when you say make installcheck; this is unlike the traditional non-TAP testing infrastructure, which expects to use an already-running test server in that case. Some PostgreSQL subdirectories contain both traditional-style and TAP-style tests, meaning that make installcheck will produce a mix of results from temporary servers and the already-running test server."

Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa