Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Michael Paquier
Тема
Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command
Дата
Msg-id
aREW7Qo0GqjfiHn7@paquier.xyz
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: isolation tester limitation in case of multiple injection points in a single command Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>
On Sun, Nov 09, 2025 at 01:53:00PM +0100, Mihail Nikalayeu wrote:
> What if we extend that limitation to allow registration of different
> types for the same injection point? Like 'wait' and 'notice' (tol be
> executed in order they registered).
> It feels like a pretty simple solution and covers my needs.

It is already possible to achieve that, isn't it?  One can define
side-by-side twice INJECTION_POINT(), then assign a different callback
to each with a strict control of the execution order.
--
Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Thomas Munro
Дата:
От: Mihail Nikalayeu
Дата:
FAQ