Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 25746.1575436347@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Windows buildfarm members vs. new async-notify isolation test
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 10:10 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Hmm ... just looking at the code again, could it be that there's >> no well-placed CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS? Andrew, could you see if >> injecting one in what 790026972 added to postgres.c helps? > I also tried to analyze this failure and it seems this is a good bet, > but I am also wondering why we have never seen such a timing issue in > other somewhat similar tests. For ex., one with comment (# > Cross-backend notification delivery.). Do they have a better way of > ensuring that the notification will be received or is it purely > coincidental that they haven't seen such a symptom? TBH, my bet is that this *won't* fix it, but it seemed like an easy thing to test. For this to fix it, you'd have to suppose that we never do a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS during a COMMIT command, which is improbable at best. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: