Re: [HACKERS] snapbuild woes
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] snapbuild woes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4387.1493642807@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] snapbuild woes (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] snapbuild woes
Re: [HACKERS] snapbuild woes |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:34:58PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: >> ... I was wondering about adding >> a loop that simply runs for like 30s and then quits or such, but who >> knows. > If the probabilistic test catches the bug even 5% of the time in typical > configurations, the buildfarm will rapidly identify any regression. I'd > choose a 7s test that detects the bug 5% of the time over a 30s test that > detects it 99% of the time. (When I wrote src/bin/pgbench/t/001_pgbench.pl > for a probabilistic bug, I sized that test to finish in 1s and catch its bug > half the time. In its case, only two buildfarm members were able to > demonstrate the original bug, so 5% detection would have been too low.) 30sec is kind of a big lump from a buildfarm standpoint, especially if you mean "it runs for 30s on my honkin' fast workstation". I'm fine with individual tests that run for ~ 1sec. (This is top-of-mind for me right now because I've been looking around for ways to speed up the regression tests.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: