Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1LEe+jJUvQa3p3LEt5eckO4Fr=YyxynaUYm-eB35T0cxQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > With that, I think it would be preferable to undo the context-hiding
> > dance in the tests, as in the attached patch, no?
>
> Would this not result in unstable test output depending on whether the
> code executes in the leader or a worker?
>

Before doing that test, we set force_parallel_mode=1, so it should always execute in worker which will ensure a stable output.


With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver