On 11/22/19 3:55 AM, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 9:00 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz
> <mailto:michael@paquier.xyz>> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 08:09:38PM +0100, Juan José Santamaría
> Flecha wrote:
> > I think Perl's open() is a bad candidate for an overload, so I
> will update
> > the previous patch that only touches slurp_file().
>
> FWIW, I don't like much the approach of patching only slurp_file().
> What gives us the guarantee that we won't have this discussion again
> in a couple of months or years once a new caller of open() is added
> for some new TAP tests, and that it has the same problems with
> multi-process concurrency?
>
>
> I agree on that, from a technical stand point, overloading open() is
> probably the best solution for the reasons above mentioned. My doubts
> come from the effort such a solution will take and its
> maintainability, also taking into account that there are not that many
> calls to open() in "src/test/perl".
>
>
I think the best course is for us to give your latest patch an outing on
the buildfarm and verify that the issues seen with slurp_file disappear.
That shouldn't take us more than a week or two to see - drongo has had 6
such failures in the last 11 days on master. After that we can discuss
how much further we might want to take it.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
