Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests
Date
Msg-id YVPaS73/TLfDzlue@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests  ("Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 03:00:13PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Should we back-patch 0002?  I'm inclined to think so.  Should
> we then also back-patch enablement of the bloom test?  Less
> sure about that, but I'd lean to doing so.  A test that appears
> to be there but isn't actually invoked is pretty misleading.

A backpatch sounds adapted to me for both patches.  The only risk that
I could see here is somebody implementing a new test by copy-pasting
this one if we were to keep things as they are on stable branches.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: reindexdb usage message about system catalogs
Next
From: "tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Added schema level support for publication.