Re: Adding facility for injection points (or probe points?) for more advanced tests

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Adding facility for injection points (or probe points?) for more advanced tests
Date: 2023-12-11 09:44:46
Message-ID: ZXbaDg5fBl8GLy2u@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 11:09:45AM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> I haven't specifically done a review or testing of this patch, but I
> have used this for testing the CLOG group update code with my
> SLRU-specific changes and I found it quite helpful to test some of the
> concurrent areas where you need to stop processing somewhere in the
> middle of the code and testing that area without this kind of
> injection point framework is really difficult or may not be even
> possible. We wanted to test the case of clog group update where we
> can get multiple processes added to a single group and get the xid
> status updated by the group leader, you can refer to my test in that
> thread[1] (the last patch test_group_commit.patch is using this
> framework for testing).

Could you be more specific? test_group_commit.patch includes this
line but there is nothing specific about this injection point getting
used in a test or a callback assigned to it:
./test_group_commit.patch:+ INJECTION_POINT("ClogGroupCommit");

> Overall I feel this framework is quite useful
> and easy to use as well.

Cool, thanks.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2023-12-11 10:00:07 Re: GUC names in messages
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2023-12-11 09:37:13 Re: Streaming I/O, vectored I/O (WIP)