Horton

Re: Improving isolationtester's data output

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2021-06-17T00:16:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 03:33:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> After checking cross-version diffs to see how painful that is likely
> to be, I'm inclined to also back-patch Michael's v13 commits
> 
> 989d23b04beac0c26f44c379b04ac781eaa4265e
>     Detect unused steps in isolation specs and do some cleanup
> 
> 9903338b5ea59093d77cfe50ec0b1c22d4a7d843
>     Remove dry-run mode from isolationtester
> 
> as those touched some of the same code areas, and it doesn't seem like
> there'd be any harm in making these aspects uniform across all the
> branches.  If Michael wants to do that back-patching himself, that's
> fine with me, otherwise I'll do it.

There may be tests in stable branches that define steps remaining
unused, but that's a minimal risk.  Down to which version do you need
these?  All the way down to 9.6?
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Improve display of query results in isolation tests.

  2. Detect unused steps in isolation specs and do some cleanup

  3. Remove dry-run mode from isolationtester