Fujii Masao <[email protected]>, 16 Mar 2026 Pzt, 10:22 tarihinde
şunu yazdı:
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 4:05 PM Hüseyin Demir <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The new v2 patch looks good to me.
> >
> > One open question from my side is should we include a test for this
> > behaviour ? Because we mentioned adding a different GUC in the future
> > to manage this rate-limiting approach. It can be useful in the future
> > once we consider/re-visit this approach. If the tests and other future
> > ideas can be developed later together we can consider adding tests
> > later.
>
> I agree it's worth adding such tests. From a quick look at the regression 
> tests,
> there don't seem to be any tests for log_lock_waits itself. So before adding
> tests for the behavior introduced by the patch, we might first need to add
> some basic tests for log_lock_waits.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Fujii Masao

I created a regression test for the behaviour we mentioned before
introducing further possible changes.

You can review it. Basically I tried to simulate the desired behaviour
which the current patch introduced.

Regards.

Attachment: v1-0001-add-regression-tests-for-still-waiting-on-lock-log-message.patch
Description: Binary data

Reply via email to