Re: [HACKERS] Fix bloom WAL tap test

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Fix bloom WAL tap test
Дата
Msg-id 18046.1510335449@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Fix bloom WAL tap test  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Fix bloom WAL tap test
Список pgsql-hackers
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Alexander Korotkov
> <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>> OK, then so be it :)

> Thanks for the new version. This one, as well as the switch to
> psql_safe in https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfduxgEYF_0BTs-mxGC4=w5sw8rnUbq9BSTp1Wq7=NwrWDA@mail.gmail.com
> are good for a committer lookup IMO.

The safe_psql change is a clear bug fix, so I've pushed it.

However, as far as adding the TAP test to the standard test suite
goes, I've got two complaints about this patch:

1. It doesn't (I think, can't test) do anything to run the test on
Windows.

2. The TAP test is enormously slower than the standard test.  On my
development workstation, "make installcheck" in contrib/bloom takes
about 0.5 sec; this patch increases that to 11.6 sec.  I'm not too
happy about that as a developer, and even less so as an owner of some
fairly slow buildfarm critters.  I'd say that this might be the
reason the TAP test wasn't part of the standard tests to begin with.

Is there anything we can do to cut the runtime of the TAP test to
the point where running it by default wouldn't be so painful?
        regards, tom lane


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Add some const decorations to prototypes
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Fix bloom WAL tap test