From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pgbench "progress" test pending solution of its timing is (fwd) |
Date: | 2018-07-12 22:03:39 |
Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.21.1807130000070.27883@lancre |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>> Indeed… but then throttling would not be tested:-) The point of the test
>>> is to exercise all time-related options, including throttling with a
>>> reasonable small value.
>>
>> Ok. I don't think that's really worthwhile. If we add some code that only
>> runs in testing, then we're not really testing the real thing. I wouldn't
>> trust the test to tell much. Let's just leave out that magic environment
>> variable thing, and try to get the rest of the patch finished.
>
> If you remove the environment, then some checks need to be removed, because
> the 2 second run may be randomly shorten when there is nothing to do. If not,
> the test will fail underterminiscally, which is not acceptable. Hence the
> hack. I agree that it is not beautiful.
>
> The more reasonable alternative could be to always last 2 seconds under -T 2,
> even if the execution can be shorten because there is nothing to do at all,
> i.e. remove the environment-based condition but keep the sleep.
Yet another option would be to replace the env variable by an option, eg
"--strict-time", that would be used probaly only by the TAP test, but
would be an available feature.
--
Fabien.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2018-07-12 22:15:54 | Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-07-12 21:57:14 | Re: pgsql: Allow using the updated tuple while moving it to a different par |