Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1+oAkz+n=KkrFxaQ-6ZDFNHW_+b-RPeQs=fp+BAt_2vpg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn  (Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [BUG] FailedAssertion in SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 10:33 PM Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Regarding the tests, the patch includes a new scenario to
>> reproduce this issue. However, since the issue can be reproduced also
>> by the existing scenario (with low probability, though), I'm not sure
>> it's worth adding the new scenario.
>
> AFAICS, the test added doesn't 100% reproduce this issue, so, maybe, it does not worth it. But, I do not have a
strongopinion here.
 
> Let's add tests in a separate commit and let the actual committer to decide what to do, should we?
>

+1 to not have a test for this as the scenario can already be tested
by the existing set of tests.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: ssl tests aren't concurrency safe due to get_free_port()
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical Replication Custom Column Expression