Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> I'd written to Tom that I was planning to revert unless the number of
> failures were lower than initially indicated. But that actually seems to
> have come to pass (the failures are quicker to report because they don't
> run the subsequent tests, of course). I'd like to let the failures
> accumulate a bit longer, say until tomorrow Midday if I haven't figured
> it out by then. With the hope of finding some detail to help pinpoint
> the issue.
There's certainly no obvious pattern here, so I agree with waiting for
more data.
regards, tom lane
