Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions
От | vignesh C |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALDaNm2-Q3Ua0c-Ja7Fe7pmaab9YNEUG1e1eDDLmqTFPCm3RoA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 3:46 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 7:07 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:30 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I have merged bugs_and_review_comments_fix.patch changes to 0001 and 0002. > > > > > > > I was wondering whether we have checked the code coverage after this > > patch? Previously, the existing tests seem to be covering most parts > > of the function ReorderBufferSerializeTXN [1]. After this patch, the > > timing to call ReorderBufferSerializeTXN will change, so that might > > impact the testing of the same. If it is already covered, then I > > would like to either add a new test or extend existing test with the > > help of new spill counters. If it is not getting covered, then we > > need to think of extending the existing test or write a new test to > > cover the function ReorderBufferSerializeTXN. > > > I have run the tests with coverage and found that > ReorderBufferSerializeTXN is not being hit. > The reason it is not being hit is because of the following check in > ReorderBufferCheckMemoryLimit: > /* bail out if we haven't exceeded the memory limit */ > if (rb->size < logical_decoding_work_mem * 1024L) > return; > Previously the tests from contrib/test_decoding could hit > ReorderBufferSerializeTXN function. > I'm checking if we can modify the test or add new test to hit > ReorderBufferSerializeTXN function. I have made one change to the configuration file in contrib/test_decoding directory, with that the coverage seems to be fine. I have seen that the coverage is almost like the code before applying the patch. I have attached the test change and the coverage report for reference. Coverage report includes the core logical work memory files for base code and by applying 0001-Add-logical_decoding_work_mem-to-limit-ReorderBuffer and 0002-Track-statistics-for-spilling patches. Regards, Vignesh EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: