Re: pgsql: Fix handling of WAL segments ready to be archived duringcrash r
От
Michael Paquier
Тема
Re: pgsql: Fix handling of WAL segments ready to be archived duringcrash r
Дата
Msg-id
20200424011437.GA806193@paquier.xyz
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
pgsql: Fix handling of WAL segments ready to be archived during crash r Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Fix handling of WAL segments ready to be archived duringcrash r Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Fix handling of WAL segments ready to be archived duringcrash r Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Fix handling of WAL segments ready to be archivedduring crash r Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Re: pgsql: Fix handling of WAL segments ready to be archived duringcrash r Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Fix handling of WAL segments ready to be archived duringcrash r Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com>
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 09:59:29AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > And this visibly comes down to the fact that we don't take care enough > of the timing between the restartpoints done, the startup process > doing its recycling work and the archiver. The rest of the test > relies on the reports of pg_stat_archiver a points to wait at as > published by the archiver process. So there are two things we could > do here: > 1) Just remove the unstable parts of the tests (the three ones above), > and keep coverage based on everything we have using pg_stat_archiver. > 2) Remove the test entirely, though I would rather have us keep some > coverage, particularly for primaries as this got broken. > > I'd rather do 2), any thoughts? Oops, sorry. I sent this message too quickly. I would rather actually do 1) and keep the major parts of the tests. All the buildfarm failures are just around the three checks mentioned upthread. -- Michael
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
От: Michael Paquier
Дата: