Re: Sync scan & regression tests

Hi,

On 2024-03-24 11:28:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes:
> > On 19/09/2023 01:57, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> On 2023-09-18 13:49:24 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>> d) Copy fewer rows to the table in the test. If we copy only 6 rows, for
> >>> example, the table will have only two pages, regardless of shared_buffers.
> >>>
> >>> I'm leaning towards d). The whole test is a little fragile, it will also
> >>> fail with a non-default block size, for example. But c) seems like a simple
> >>> fix and wouldn't look too out of place in the test.
>
> >> Hm, what do you mean with the last sentence? Oh, is the test you're
> >> referencing the relation-extension logic?
>
> > Sorry, I said "c) seems like a simple fix ...", but I meant "d) seems
> > like a simple fix ..."
> > I meant the attached.
>
> This thread stalled out months ago, but chipmunk is still failing in
> HEAD and v16.  Can we please have a fix?  I'm good with Heikki's
> adjustment to the pg_visibility test case.

I pushed Heikki's adjustment. Thanks for the "fix" and the reminder.

Greetings,

Andres Freund