Re: Weird test mixup - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Weird test mixup
Date
Msg-id Zg9frr5iIam3fhd7@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Weird test mixup  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Weird test mixup
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 10:04:45AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Please find a patch to do exactly that, without touching the backend
> APIs.  0001 adds a new function call injection_points_local() that can
> be added on top of a SQL test to make it concurrent-safe.  0002 is the
> fix for the GIN tests.
>
> I am going to add an open item to not forget about all that.

It's been a couple of weeks since this has been sent, and this did not
get any reviews.  I'd still be happy with the simplicity of a single
injection_points_local() that can be used to link all the injection
points created in a single process to it, discarding them once the
process exists with a shmem exit callback.  And I don't really see an
argument to tweak the backend-side routines, as well.  Comments and/or
objections?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: IPC::Run::time[r|out] vs our TAP tests
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: IPC::Run::time[r|out] vs our TAP tests