Horton

Re: Testing LISTEN/NOTIFY more effectively

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Date: 2019-07-27T22:48:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-07-27 15:39:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Unfortunately, I just found out that on a slow enough machine
>> (prairiedog's host) there *is* some variation in when that test's
>> notices come out.  I am unsure whether that's to be expected or
>> whether there's something wrong there

> Hm. Any chance you could show the diff? I don't immediately see why.

Sure.  If I remove the client_min_messages hack from HEAD, then on
my dev workstation I get the attached test diff; that reproduces
quite reliably on a couple of machines.  However, running that
diff on prairiedog's host gets the failure attached second more
often than not.  (Sometimes it will pass.)

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Improve test coverage for LISTEN/NOTIFY.

  2. Don't drop NOTICE messages in isolation tests.

  3. Fix isolationtester race condition for notices sent before blocking.