Re: TAP tests aren't using the magic words for Windows file access - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | [email protected] |
---|---|
Subject | Re: TAP tests aren't using the magic words for Windows file access |
Date | |
Msg-id | [email protected] Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: TAP tests aren't using the magic words for Windows file access (Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>) |
Responses |
Re: TAP tests aren't using the magic words for Windows file access
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
Hello hackers, Are there any plans to backport the patch to earlier versions of the Postgres? https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=114541d58e5970e51b78b77b65de16210beaab43 We rarely see the issue with the pg_ctl/004_logrotate test on the REL_12_STABLE branch. On my notebook I can easily reproduce the "Permission denied at src/test/perl/TestLib.pm line 259" error with the small change below. But the same test on the 13th version and the 12th version with the TestLib patch does not fail. diff --git a/src/bin/pg_ctl/t/004_logrotate.pl b/src/bin/pg_ctl/t/004_logrotate.pl index bc39abd23e4..e49e159bc84 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_ctl/t/004_logrotate.pl +++ b/src/bin/pg_ctl/t/004_logrotate.pl @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ for (my $attempts = 0; $attempts < $max_attempts; $attempts++) { $new_current_logfiles = slurp_file($node->data_dir . '/current_logfiles'); last if $new_current_logfiles ne $current_logfiles; - usleep(100_000); + usleep(1); } note "now current_logfiles = $new_current_logfiles"; On 2019-11-22 20:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 11/22/19 3:55 AM, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 9:00 AM Michael Paquier <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 08:09:38PM +0100, Juan José Santamaría >> Flecha wrote: >> > I think Perl's open() is a bad candidate for an overload, so I >> will update >> > the previous patch that only touches slurp_file(). >> >> FWIW, I don't like much the approach of patching only >> slurp_file(). >> What gives us the guarantee that we won't have this discussion >> again >> in a couple of months or years once a new caller of open() is >> added >> for some new TAP tests, and that it has the same problems with >> multi-process concurrency? >> >> >> I agree on that, from a technical stand point, overloading open() is >> probably the best solution for the reasons above mentioned. My doubts >> come from the effort such a solution will take and its >> maintainability, also taking into account that there are not that many >> calls to open() in "src/test/perl". >> >> > > > I think the best course is for us to give your latest patch an outing > on > the buildfarm and verify that the issues seen with slurp_file > disappear. > That shouldn't take us more than a week or two to see - drongo has had > 6 > such failures in the last 11 days on master. After that we can discuss > how much further we might want to take it. > > > cheers > > > andrew -- regards, Roman Zharkov
pgsql-hackers by date: