Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
Date
Msg-id CAM-w4HNjC=jAbo6EM_itppX7fWkmPWihGz5iM=mim32P-fSuNA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)  (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>)
Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 26 Nov 2021 at 21:47, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Yeah ... on the one hand, that machine has shown signs of
> hard-to-reproduce flakiness, so it's easy to write off the failures
> I saw as hardware issues.  On the other hand, the flakiness I've
> seen has otherwise manifested as kernel crashes, which is nothing
> like the consistent test failures I was seeing with the patch.

Hm. I asked around and found a machine I can use that can run PPC
binaries, but it's actually, well, confusing. I think this is an x86
machine running Leopard which uses JIT to transparently run PPC
binaries. I'm not sure this is really a good test.

But if you're interested and can explain the tests to run I can try to
get the tests running on this machine:

IBUILD:~ gsstark$ uname -a
Darwin IBUILD.MIT.EDU 9.8.0 Darwin Kernel Version 9.8.0: Wed Jul 15
16:55:01 PDT 2009; root:xnu-1228.15.4~1/RELEASE_I386 i386

IBUILD:~ gsstark$ sw_vers
ProductName: Mac OS X
ProductVersion: 10.5.8
BuildVersion: 9L31a



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Shinya Kato
Date:
Subject: Re: Emit a warning if the extension's GUC is set incorrectly
Next
From: "kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Allow escape in application_name