Tom Lane wrote:
> This seems like pretty good evidence that we should remove the "ignored"
> marking for the random test, and maybe remove that functionality from
> pg_regress altogether. We could probably adjust the test to decrease
> its risk-of-failure by another factor of ten or so, if anyone feels like
> 0.005% failure probability is too high.
I suppose that as far as the buildfarm goes it's okay that the test
fails from time to time, but it may be worse from packagers' points of
view, where a randomly failing test can wreck the whole building
process. Is a 0.005% failure probability low enough that nobody will be
bothered by that?
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: