Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
Date
Msg-id CAH2-WzkmNN0kwPBO8t=waOCikWM4KLX9fWEYyt2oyWP08u3mSg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 1:47 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Again, this seems to me to be breaking the test's real-world applicability
> for a (false?) sense of stability.

I agree.

A lot of the VACUUM test flappiness issues we've had to deal with in
the past now seem like problems with VACUUM itself, the test's design,
or both. For example, why should we get a totally different
pg_class.reltuples because we couldn't get a cleanup lock on some
page? Why not just make sure to give the same answer either way,
which happens to be the most useful behavior to the user? That way
the test isn't just targeting implementation details.

--
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Matthias van de Meent
Date:
Subject: Re: Clarifying Commitfest policies
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks