On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 12:30:20PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay, applied and backpatched with a minimal test set, then. I have
> kept the tweaks I did to the tests with extra comments.
Thanks!
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 10:00:11AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> What is the purpose of testing it without the checkpoint?
Perhaps none, I was wondering whether it would be worth testing that
with the flush phase, but perhaps that's just extra cycles wasted at
this point.
> Other than that
> que
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 03:13:10PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> The test enforces a checkpoint after the table creation on the
> template, so what about testing it also without a checkpoint, like the
> extended version attached? I have tweaked a few things in the test,
> while on it.
What is t
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 10:24:13AM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > Yes, there is no reason to pass this as false, seems like this is
> > passed false by mistake. And your patch fixes the issue.
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 02:26:55PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> So, if I am understanding this stuff
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 04:43:22PM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 05:02:01PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 02:35:30PM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>> I'm happy to move this new test to wherever folks think it should go. I'll
>>> look around to se
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 05:02:01PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 02:35:30PM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I'm happy to move this new test to wherever folks think it should go. I'll
>> look around to see if I can find a better place, too.
>
> I think that src/test/recov
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 02:35:30PM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I'm happy to move this new test to wherever folks think it should go. I'll
> look around to see if I can find a better place, too.
I think that src/test/recovery/ is the best fit, because this stresses
a code path for WAL replay on
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 03:13:32PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 16.02.23 22:29, Andres Freund wrote:
>> What's the story behind 100_bugs.pl? This name clearly is copied from
>> src/test/subscription/t/100_bugs.pl - but I've never understood why that is
>> outside of the normal numbering spac
On 16.02.23 22:29, Andres Freund wrote:
What's the story behind 100_bugs.pl? This name clearly is copied from
src/test/subscription/t/100_bugs.pl - but I've never understood why that is
outside of the normal numbering space.
Mainly to avoid awkwardness for backpatching. The number of tests in
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 2:59 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2023-02-16 12:37:57 +0530, Robert Haas wrote:
> > The patch creates 100_bugs.pl
>
> What's the story behind 100_bugs.pl? This name clearly is copied from
> src/test/subscription/t/100_bugs.pl - but I've never understood why that is
> outs
On 2023-02-16 12:37:57 +0530, Robert Haas wrote:
> The patch creates 100_bugs.pl
What's the story behind 100_bugs.pl? This name clearly is copied from
src/test/subscription/t/100_bugs.pl - but I've never understood why that is
outside of the normal numbering space.
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:38 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:32 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > I think the below change is not relevant to this bug right?
> >
> > diff --git a/src/test/recovery/meson.build b/src/test/recovery/meson.build
> > index 209118a639..6e9f8a7c7f 100644
>
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:37:57PM +0530, Robert Haas wrote:
> Why not? The patch creates 100_bugs.pl so it also adds it to meson.build.
It would not matter for REL_15_STABLE, but on HEAD all the new TAP
test files have to be added in their respective meson.build. If you
don't do that, the CFBot
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:32 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> I think the below change is not relevant to this bug right?
>
> diff --git a/src/test/recovery/meson.build b/src/test/recovery/meson.build
> index 209118a639..6e9f8a7c7f 100644
> --- a/src/test/recovery/meson.build
> +++ b/src/test/recovery/mes
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:11 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 02:26:55PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > So, if I am understanding this stuff right, this issue can create data
> > corruption once a DDL updates any pages of pg_class stored in a
> > template database that gets
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 02:26:55PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> So, if I am understanding this stuff right, this issue can create data
> corruption once a DDL updates any pages of pg_class stored in a
> template database that gets copied by this routine. In this case, the
> patch sent makes sur
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 10:24:13AM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> Yes, there is no reason to pass this as false, seems like this is
> passed false by mistake. And your patch fixes the issue.
So, if I am understanding this stuff right, this issue can create data
corruption once a DDL updates any page
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 5:37 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 04:49:38AM +, Ryo Matsumura (Fujitsu) wrote:
> > The above is occured by the following call.
> > The argument 'permanent' of ReadBufferWithoutRelcache() is passed to
> > BufferAlloc() as 'relpersistence'.
> >
> >
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 04:49:38AM +, Ryo Matsumura (Fujitsu) wrote:
> The above is occured by the following call.
> The argument 'permanent' of ReadBufferWithoutRelcache() is passed to
> BufferAlloc() as 'relpersistence'.
>
> [src/backend/commands/]
> 298 buf = ReadBufferWithoutRelca
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 04:49:38AM +, Ryo Matsumura (Fujitsu) wrote:
> Hi, hackers.
>
> I found that CREATE DATABASE occurs lost of DDL result after crash server.
> The direct cause is that the checkpoint skips sync for page of template1's
> main fork
> because buffer status is not marked as
20 matches
Mail list logo
