On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 07:40:57PM -0400, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> That's probably why it's not finding anything now: most people working
> on something that touches WAL already know that testing their patch
> with wal_consistency_checking early is a good idea. Of course it also
> wouldn't be a bad idea to have a BF animal for that, especially
> because we already have BF animals that test things far more niche
> than this.
wal_consistency_checking has been enabled a couple of days ago on
batta, and the runs are clean:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=batta&br=HEAD
Recovery tests take a bit longer, but that's still OK on this host.
For now, this mode only runs on HEAD.
--
Michael
