Re: Instability in partition_prune test? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Instability in partition_prune test?
Date
Msg-id 20180413140123.2nduqvge5fw5zsjw@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Instability in partition_prune test?  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
David Rowley wrote:
> On 13 April 2018 at 14:41, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > I'll just need to go think about how we can make the test stable now.
> 
> Thomas and I discussed this a bit off-list.
> 
> The attached basically adds:
> 
> set max_parallel_workers = 0;
> 
> before the Parallel Append tests.
> 
> All those tests were intended to do what check that "(never executed)"
> appeared for the correct nodes. They still do that.

Makes sense -- pushed.  Thanks David and Thomas for your efforts
tracking this down.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Konstantin Knizhnik
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres stucks in deadlock detection
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Instability in partition_prune test?