> The code in xlog.c filters out the syncs for WAL_SYNC_METHOD_OPEN and
> WAL_SYNC_METHOD_OPEN_DSYNC, wouldn't it be more consistent to do the
> same in the code and the SQL test, using an IN clause with the two
> values that block the syncs rather than a NOT IN clause with the three
> values that allow the syncs?
I actually originally had it this way, but for some reason
felt it would be better to be explicit about the methods we want to test rather
than not test. I can't think of a very compelling reason to go either way, so v2
LGTM.
>> Hmm, that's a little nasty, because it's not showing up in the
>> buildfarm. It appears from a little testing that the issue only
>> manifests if you have fsync = on, which we generally don't on
> >buildfarm animals.
> right, "make check" does not encounter this because it runs
> with fsync=off, as I mentioned at the top of the thread.
what do you think of this? I think we should set fsync = on
at least for the part of the test that proceeds the 2 checkpoints and
set if back to off at the end of the tests for fsync stats. It is concerning
the tests for the fsync stats are not being exercised in
the buildfarm.
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
