Re: why can the isolation tester handle only one waiting process?

On February 9, 2016 7:12:23 PM GMT+01:00, Robert Haas  wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Robert Haas 
>wrote:
>> Here's an updated patch series with some more improvements to the
>> isolationtester code, and some better test cases.
>
>OK, here's a final set of patches that I intend to commit in the next
>few days if nobody objects, per discussion on the thread about
>parallelism fixes.  It's basically the same as the previous set, but
>there's a bug fix and an additional test case.

Fwiw, as the person starting the ruckus over there, I think something like isolationtester has a much lower need for careful review, consensus et al than say lock.c and deadlock.c.

Andres

--- 
Please excuse brevity and formatting - I am writing this on my mobile phone.