Horton

Re: Why is DEFAULT_FDW_TUPLE_COST so insanely low?

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-11-02T07:22:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 08:19:35PM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> No tests were introduced.  Is this the only existing one that's
> unstable as far as you saw?

That seems to be the only one.

> I'm not yet seeing any failures in the buildfarm, so don't really want
> to push a fix for this one if there are going to be a few more
> unstable ones to fix.  I may just hold off a while to see.

The CF bot is also thinking that this is not really stable, impacting
the tests of the patches:
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6685074121293824
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4739402799251456
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5209803589419008
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Stabilize postgres_fdw tests on 32-bit machines

  2. Attempt to stabilize postgres_fdw tests

  3. Increase DEFAULT_FDW_TUPLE_COST from 0.01 to 0.2

  4. Add postgres_fdw contrib module.