On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 2:39 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > I did add the following query just before the failing one and included
> > the expected output from below. The tests pass for me in make check
> > and the post-upgrade test passes in make check-world too. I guess we
> > could commit that and see if it fails along with the other mentioned
> > failure.
>
> I'm thinking this is a good idea, although I think we could be more
> aggressive about the data collected, as attached. Since all of these
> ought to be single-page tables, the relpages and reltuples counts
> should be machine-independent. In theory anyway.
Huh, idiacanthus failed showing vacuum_count 0, in select_parallel.
So ... the VACUUM command somehow skipped those tables?
--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com
