Re: [HACKERS] Reducing runtime of stats regression test - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Reducing runtime of stats regression test
Date
Msg-id 7130.1493907721@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Reducing runtime of stats regression test  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Reducing runtime of stats regression test  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> We can just start a new connection with \c, and
>> let wait_for_stats wait for the old one to send its stats before quitting.
>> Even on my oldest and slowest buildfarm machines, starting a new session
>> takes well under one second.

> So you changed table prevstats from temp to permanent;

Right, so it would survive into the new session.

> perhaps make it unlogged?

Hardly seems worth it; there's not much data in it.  And we're not
generally in the habit of marking short-lived tables as unlogged
elsewhere in the regression tests.  (Maybe we should make some
effort to have some of them be so marked, but that seems like
material for its own patch.)

> I wonder if it'd be useful to have a "pg_stat_flush" or something, which
> sends out whatever is queued in this session.  Then you wouldn't need
> the reconnection.

Yes, but that would be getting into the realm of new features, not
post-feature-freeze test adjustments.  It certainly couldn't be
a candidate for back-patching.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Reducing runtime of stats regression test
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] statement_timeout is not working as expected with postgres_fdw