On Thu, Nov 12, 2026 at 4:40 PM Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2026-Nov-12, Zhijie Hou wrote: > > > Since there's only one publication in this file, I think the current name is > > fine as we don't need to distinguish it from any other publication. Similar > > names are also used in other tests. > > Right now, isolation tests run one after the other, so you're right that > this name doesn't really matter much. However, someday it might be nice > if we can make (some of) them run in parallel. We tried to do that eons > ago, couldn't find the time to implement it, idea was forgotten. If > that effort ever takes off again it would be nice if we don't have to > fix a thousand pointless name conflicts of this kind. (We already have > enough of those that we'll have to fix.) So I think Shveta had the > right idea here. >
Fair enough, now that I have committed the patch, is it worth considering to change the name in HEAD-only? BTW, it will be helpful to get some feedback from you on the 0004 patch in email [1] as that directly touches the detach partition ... concurrently code path. You might want to read the email [2] to understand the issue 0004 patch is trying to solve. [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CADzfLwU97r3QC5oZDeVcWvcvXhNy9VnoFNDVHw%2BERg_DEG4%3DFQ%40mail.gmail.com [2]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABdArM4fJ8JAWyP0MAF%3D8n66M6%3DCouUmtSGwqizn2pD%3DgfPEZw%40mail.gmail.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
