Re: Range checks of pg_test_fsync --secs-per-test and pg_test_timing --duration - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Range checks of pg_test_fsync --secs-per-test and pg_test_timing --duration
Date
Msg-id 20200920034113.GA1858@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Range checks of pg_test_fsync --secs-per-test and pg_test_timing --duration  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Range checks of pg_test_fsync --secs-per-test and pg_test_timing --duration  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 05:22:15PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay, after looking at that, here is v3.  This includes range checks
> as well as errno checks based on strtol().  What do you think?

This fails in the CF bot on Linux because of pg_logging_init()
returning with errno=ENOTTY in the TAP tests, for which I began a new
thread:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200918095713.GA20887@paquier.xyz

Not sure if this will lead anywhere, but we can also address the
failure by enforcing errno=0 for the new calls of strtol() introduced
in this patch.  So here is an updated patch doing so.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Collation versioning
Next
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions