Re: sidewinder has one failure
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: sidewinder has one failure |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1+UQ=tvd=8uc2GqF9UpaBgO6FjopKdea1dMD+xN7HxN9w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: sidewinder has one failure (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: sidewinder has one failure
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 8:00 AM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 06:56:48AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > In the latter case, we either want to > > (a) tweak the test to raise the value of max_files_per_process, (b) > > remove the test entirely. > > I generally favor keeping the test, but feel free to decide it's too hard. > I am thinking that for now, we should raise the limit of max_files_per_process in the test to something like 35 or 40, so that sidewinder passes and unblocks other people who might get blocked due to this, for example, I think one case is reported here (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200106105608.GB18560%40msg.df7cb.de, see Ubuntu bionic ..). I feel with this still we shall be able to catch the problem we are facing on 'tern' and 'mandrill'. Do you have any opinion on this? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: