Re: Run pg_amcheck in 002_pg_upgrade.pl and 027_stream_regress.pl? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Run pg_amcheck in 002_pg_upgrade.pl and 027_stream_regress.pl?
Date
Msg-id 20220405003958.a4aygou72d3tmwgy@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Run pg_amcheck in 002_pg_upgrade.pl and 027_stream_regress.pl?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Run pg_amcheck in 002_pg_upgrade.pl and 027_stream_regress.pl?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2022-04-05 08:46:06 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 03, 2022 at 11:53:03AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > It seems $subject would have a chance of catching some of these bugs, as well
> > as exposing amcheck to a database with a bit more varied content?
> 
> Makes sense to me to extend that.
> 
> > Depending on the cost it might make sense to do this optionally, via
> > PG_TEST_EXTRA?
> 
> Yes, it would be good to check the difference in run-time before
> introducing more.  A logical dump of the regression database is no
> more than 15MB if I recall correctly, so my guess is that most of the
> runtime is still going to be eaten by the run of pg_regress.

On my workstation it takes about 2.39s to run pg_amcheck on a regression
database with all thoroughness options enabled. With -j4 it's 0.62s.

Without more thorough checking it's 1.24s and 0.30s with -j4.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Extensible Rmgr for Table AMs
Next
From: Peter Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup