On Tue, 2025-06-03 at 13:13 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> In all the approaches I've considered, this one was the least worst
> of
> all based on the point that all the complexity is hidden in the test
> module; there is no need to touch the backend code at all as long as
> there is a way to retrieve the list of points that would be dumped to
> disk.
True, though it does create a new file.
> Another set of test cases I had in mind was waits during recovery
> before consistency is reached. There is no way to add a point
> without
> connecting to the database, and we've had plenty of fixes involving
> the startup process and a different process, mostly the checkpointer.
> That's an annoying limitation.
If you have in mind some other ways to use it than I like it a lot
more. And I don't have a better idea.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
