On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 11:15 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > > I'm not sure > > that a TAP test is required here, so I didn't add one. I'll be happy > > to do so though if needed. > > You could make that reliable by getting a lock on a table using a > two-phase transaction, and your test case from upthread won't fly high > as we have no facility in PostgresNode.pm to keep around a session's > state using psql. FWIW, I am not convinced that it is a case worth > bothering, so no tests is fine.
Yes, adding a test for this case looked like requiring a lot of creativity using TAP infrastructure, that's the main reason why I didn't add one. 2PC is a good idea though.
