Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes:
> Interesting, but I'm not sure how that could be though. Perhaps, a
> bit like the other thing that cropped up in the build farm after that
> commit, removing ~200ms of needless sleeping around an earlier online
> CHECKPOINT made some other pre-existing race condition more likely to
> go wrong.
The data that we've got is entirely consistent with the idea that
there's a timing-sensitive bug that gets made more or less likely
to trigger by "unrelated" changes in test cases or server code.
regards, tom lane
