Re: base backup vs. concurrent truncation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Aleksander Alekseev
Subject Re: base backup vs. concurrent truncation
Date
Msg-id CAJ7c6TNR-bXC7QBdV8bfUWeL6rbtqR=8KyYW8Ph33DS8ERU4Mg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: base backup vs. concurrent truncation  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: base backup vs. concurrent truncation
List pgsql-hackers
Hi Robert,

> I admit I haven't done the legwork to nail down a test
> case where everything comes together just right to show user-visible
> breakage, but your success in finding one where it doesn't is no proof
> of anything.

Respectfully, what made you think this was my intention?

Quite the opposite, personally I am inclined to think that the problem
does exist. In order to fix it however we need a test that reliably
reproduces it first. Otherwise there is no way to figure out whether
the fix was correct or not.

What the experiment showed is that the test scenario you initially
described is probably the wrong one for reasons yet to be understood
and we need to come up with a better one.

-- 
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: psql tests hangs
Next
From: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)"
Date:
Subject: RE: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node