Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1+oAkz+n=KkrFxaQ-6ZDFNHW_+b-RPeQs=fp+BAt_2vpg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn (Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 10:33 PM Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Regarding the tests, the patch includes a new scenario to >> reproduce this issue. However, since the issue can be reproduced also >> by the existing scenario (with low probability, though), I'm not sure >> it's worth adding the new scenario. > > AFAICS, the test added doesn't 100% reproduce this issue, so, maybe, it does not worth it. But, I do not have a strongopinion here. > Let's add tests in a separate commit and let the actual committer to decide what to do, should we? > +1 to not have a test for this as the scenario can already be tested by the existing set of tests. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: