> 1) Could we use 0/0 instead of $lsn3 for these rejection tests? Since > $lsn3 is deliberately unreachable, the first test can hang if the > isolation check is missing.
I think I will keep this as-is. If the isolation-level rejection is missing, the test is broken. > 2) Also, the isolation-error pattern matches the old DETAIL, so > matching the ERROR: prefix would verify that it is now the primary > error. v4 tightens the new recovery tests so the REPEATABLE READ cases match the primary ERROR line, rather than the old DETAIL text. I also cleaned up one test description. > The cursor case better additionally check that the misleading > isolation-level detail is absent. I don't think we need that. The cursor case only needs to verify the new primary error. -- Sami Imseih Amazon Web Services (AWS)
v4-0001-Fix-WAIT-FOR-rejection-errors.patch
Description: Binary data
