On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 11:15 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure
> > that a TAP test is required here, so I didn't add one. I'll be happy
> > to do so though if needed.
>
> You could make that reliable by getting a lock on a table using a
> two-phase transaction, and your test case from upthread won't fly high
> as we have no facility in PostgresNode.pm to keep around a session's
> state using psql. FWIW, I am not convinced that it is a case worth
> bothering, so no tests is fine.
Yes, adding a test for this case looked like requiring a lot of
creativity using TAP infrastructure, that's the main reason why I
didn't add one. 2PC is a good idea though.
