Re: Instability in partition_prune test?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Instability in partition_prune test?
Дата
Msg-id 31299.1523914270@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Instability in partition_prune test?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Ответы Re: Instability in partition_prune test?  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Seems reasonable.  I'm still uncomfortable with the assumption
>> that if we ask for two workers we will get two workers, but
>> that's a pre-existing problem in other parallel regression tests.

> Yeah, I was looking at that line and wondering.  But I think that'd
> require a different approach (*if* we see it fail, which I'm not sure we
> have), such as suppressing the Workers Launched lines without a plpgsql
> function to do it, since it's much more prevalent than this problem.

At least in this case, some of the "row" counts also depend on number
of workers, no?  So just hiding that line wouldn't do it.

Anyway, I agree that we shouldn't solve that problem until we see
that it's a problem in practice.

            regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Instability in partition_prune test?
Следующее
От: David Rowley
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Instability in partition_prune test?