Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Still, I don't think this is a reasonable test design.  We have
> >> absolutely no idea what behaviors are being triggered in the other
> >> tests, except that they are unrelated to what those tests think they
> >> are testing.
> > I can of course move it to a separate parallel test, but I don't think
> > that should be really necessary.
> I've not proven this rigorously, but it seems obvious in hindsight:
> what's happening is that when the object_address test drops everything
> with DROP CASCADE, other processes are sometimes just starting to execute
> the event trigger when the DROP commits.  When they go to look up the
> trigger function, they don't find it, leading to "cache lookup failed for
> function".

Hm, maybe we can drop the event trigger explicitely first, then wait a
little bit, then drop the remaining objects with DROP CASCADE?

Álvaro Herrera      
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to