Re: Testing LISTEN/NOTIFY more effectively - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Testing LISTEN/NOTIFY more effectively
Date
Msg-id 5720.1564249986@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Testing LISTEN/NOTIFY more effectively  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Testing LISTEN/NOTIFY more effectively  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Testing LISTEN/NOTIFY more effectively  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-07-27 12:46:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm finding alternative #3 the most attractive, because we really
>> want isolation-style testing for LISTEN/NOTIFY, and this solution
>> doesn't require designing a psql feature that we'd need to get
>> consensus on.

> Perhaps we could just have isolationtester check to which
> isolationtester session the backend pid belongs? And then print the
> session name instead of the pid? That should be fairly easy, and would
> probably give us all we need?

Oh, that's a good idea -- it's already tracking all the backend PIDs,
so probably not much extra work to do it like that.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Testing LISTEN/NOTIFY more effectively
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Testing LISTEN/NOTIFY more effectively