On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 09:19:35AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Apr 13, 2025 at 11:51:57AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > > > Tom and Michael, do you still object to the test addition, or not? If > > > there > > > are no new or renewed objections by 2025-04-20, I'll proceed to add the > > > test.
Pushed as commit 714bd9e. The failure so far is https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=skink&dt=2025-04-20%2015%3A36%3A35 with these highlights: pg_ctl: server does not shut down 2025-04-20 17:27:35.735 UTC [1576688][postmaster][:0] LOG: received immediate shutdown request 2025-04-20 17:27:35.969 UTC [1577386][archiver][:0] FATAL: archive command was terminated by signal 3: Quit 2025-04-20 17:27:35.969 UTC [1577386][archiver][:0] DETAIL: The failed archive command was: cp "pg_wal/00000001000000000000006D" "/home/bf/bf-build/skink-master/HEAD/pgsql.build/testrun/recovery/045_archive_restartpoint/data/t_045_archive_restartpoint_primary_data/archives/00000001000000000000006D" The checkpoints and WAL creation took 30s, but archiving was only 20% done (based on file name 00000001000000000000006D) at the 360s PGCTLTIMEOUT. I can reproduce this if I test with valgrind --trace-children=yes. With my normal valgrind settings, the whole test file takes only 18s. I recommend one of these changes to skink: - Add --trace-children-skip='/bin/*,/usr/bin/*' so valgrind doesn't instrument "sh" and "cp" commands. - Remove --trace-children=yes Andres, what do you think about making one of those skink configuration changes? Alternatively, I could make the test poll until archiving catches up. However, that would take skink about 30min, and I expect little value from 30min of valgrind instrumenting the "cp" command.
