Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag
Date
Msg-id ZSzjVRaLMbwg-9gi@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 10:47:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I agree that that probably is the root cause, and we should fix it
> by bumping up max_worker_processes in this test.

Thanks.  I've fixed this one now.  Let's see if mamba is OK after
that.

> If there's actually a defensible reason for the C code to act
> like that, then all the call sites need to have checks for
> a null result.

We're just talking about a test module and an ERROR in the same
fashion as autoprewarm makes things more predictible for the TAP
script, IMO.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Konstantin Knizhnik
Date:
Subject: Re: Can concurrent create index concurrently block each other?
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_logical_emit_message() misses a XLogFlush()