On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 10:29 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 10:18 AM John Naylor <john.naylor@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 4:17 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > This one seems to be FSM test portability issue (due to different page
> > > contents, maybe). Looking into it, John, see if you are around and
> > > have some thoughts on it.
> >
> > Maybe we can use the same plpgsql loop as fsm.sql that exits after 1
> > tuple has inserted into the 5th page.
> >
>
> Yeah that can also work, but we still need to be careful about the
> alignment of that one tuple, otherwise, there will could be different
> free space on the fifth page. The probably easier way could be to use
> an even number of integers in the table say(int, int). Anyway, for
> now, I have avoided the dependency on FSM contents without losing on
> coverage of test. I have pushed my latest suggestion in the previous
> email.
>
The change seems to have worked. All the buildfarm machines that were
showing the failure are passed now.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com