On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 11:44 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2018-04-06 16:59:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> But in particular, it's clear that partition_prune and > >> isolation/checksum_cancel are showing big problems. > > > While I'm obviously also unhappy about the frantic push to push semi > > baked stuff, I'm not sure the two issues you point to above are that > > good examples of carelessness. At least the latter seems mostly a pretty > > normal portability thing around orderedness? > > I'm just venting, perhaps, but if there's a good reason for that > to have been left broken for ~24 hours, I don't know what it is. > It's getting in the way of testing other recent commits. > > (I'm also not real happy about the amount of time the checksum-xxx > tests consume.) > The isolation tester ones, or the regular ones? Because the regular ones finish in << 30 seconds here, just wondering if that actually counts as too time consuming in this type of tests? -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
