On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > If I am off base, please feel free to yell Latin at me again but isn't this > exactly what different trees are for in Git? Would it be possible to say: > > Robert says, "Hey pull XYZ, run ABC tests. They are what the parallelism > fixes do"? > > I can't review this patch but I can run a test suite on a number of > platforms and see if it behaves as expected.
Sure, I'd love to have the ability to push a branch into the buildfarm and have the tests get run on all the buildfarm machines and let that bake for a while before putting it into the main tree. The problem here is that the complicated part of this patch is something that's only going to be tested in very rare cases. The simple part of the patch, which handles the simple-deadlock case, is easy to hit, although apparently zero people other than Amit and I have found it in the few months since parallel sequential scan was committed, which makes me thing people haven't tried very hard to break any part of parallel query, which is a shame. The really hairy part is in deadlock.c, and it's actually very hard to hit that case. It won't be hit in real life except in pretty rare circumstances. So testing is good, but you not only need to know what you are testing but probably have an automated tool that can run the test a gazillion times in a loop, or be really clever and find a test case that Amit and I didn't foresee. And the reality is that getting anybody independent of the parallel query effort to take an interested in deep testing has not gone anywhere at all up until now. I'd be happy for that change, whether because of this commit or for any other reason. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers