Horton

Re: Weird test mixup

Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-03-15T11:09:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 15/03/2024 01:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
>> Or we could just disable runningcheck because of the concurrency
>> requirement in this test.  The test would still be able to run, just
>> less times.
> 
> No, actually we *must* mark all these tests NO_INSTALLCHECK if we
> stick with the current definition of injection points.  The point
> of installcheck mode is that the tests are supposed to be safe to
> run in a live installation.  Side-effects occurring in other
> databases are completely not OK.

I committed a patch to do that, to put out the fire.

-- 
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)

Commits

  1. injection_points: Store runtime conditions in private area

  2. Introduce private data area for injection points

  3. injection_points: Fix incorrect spinlock acquisition

  4. Make GIN tests using injection points concurrent-safe

  5. injection_points: Fix race condition with local injection point tests

  6. injection_points: Introduce runtime conditions

  7. Make GIN test using injection points repeatable

  8. Fix backstop in gin test if injection point is not reached

  9. Try to unbreak injection-fault tests in the buildfarm

  10. Disable tests using injection points in installcheck