On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 5:59 PM Mircea Cadariu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 28/11/2025 02:15, Fujii Masao wrote: > > I've made a few minor adjustments to the test patch. > The updated version is attached. > > Thanks for the updated patch! Nice improvements. > > Two futher proposals for the current version of the test. > > Shall we use slurp_file then everywhere we need file reads? (instead of > pg_read_file)
Maybe it's better to use slurp_file(). We already have wait_for_log() to wait for a message in the cluster's log file, but there's no helper function to wait for specific content to appear in an arbitrary file. To support waiting for output in pg_recvlogical's output file, I added a new helper that uses slurp_file() (see the attached 0002 patch). I also updated the 0003 patch (the pg_recvlogical reconnection test) to use this helper instead of pg_read_file(). Thoughts? > The following can be seen as nits for your consideration. > > We can consider making the string provided in the "or die" to be consistent > with the comment. We can pick one of the options below and specify the same > for each. > > * receive and write the first INSERT / receive first INSERT > > * establish a new connection / to reconnect > > * receive and write / receive As a result of removing poll_query_until() with pg_read_file(), the patch now contains only one "or die" code. In that case, I chose "to reconnect" rather than "establish a new connection". > If we are mentioning multiple INSERTs instead of just one, might read better > if we add the "s" at the end. This might be just my preference though, I > leave it up to you. Agreed, I've applied that change. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
v3-0003-Add-test-for-pg_recvlogical-reconnection-behavior.patch
Description: Binary data
v3-0001-pg_recvlogical-Prevent-flushed-data-from-being-re.patch
Description: Binary data
v3-0002-Add-a-new-helper-function-wait_for_file-to-Utils..patch
Description: Binary data
