Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2023-03-28 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 9:44 PM Gregory Stark (as CFM) wrote: > On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 20:52, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > > > I'll continue work on this patch. The rebased patch is attached. It > > implements stop events as configure option (not runtime GUC option). > > It looks like this pat

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2023-03-28 Thread Gregory Stark (as CFM)
On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 20:52, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > I'll continue work on this patch. The rebased patch is attached. It > implements stop events as configure option (not runtime GUC option). It looks like this patch isn't going to be ready this commitfest. And it hasn't received much di

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2022-10-17 Thread Craig Ringer
On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 at 08:09, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 2:42 AM Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > Thank you for your feedback! > > It would be nice to use this patch to test things that are important > but untested inside vacuumlazy.c, such as the rare > HEAPTUPLE_DEAD/tupgon

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2022-08-31 Thread Alexander Korotkov
Hi! On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 3:09 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 2:42 AM Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > Thank you for your feedback! > > It would be nice to use this patch to test things that are important > but untested inside vacuumlazy.c, such as the rare > HEAPTUPLE_DEAD

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2021-02-22 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 2:42 AM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Thank you for your feedback! It would be nice to use this patch to test things that are important but untested inside vacuumlazy.c, such as the rare HEAPTUPLE_DEAD/tupgone case (grep for "Ordinarily, DEAD tuples would have been removed by

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-08 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:26 PM Andrey Borodin wrote: > > 25 нояб. 2020 г., в 19:10, Alexander Korotkov > > написал(а): > > > > In the code stop events are defined using macro STOPEVENT(event_id, > > params). The 'params' should be a function call, and it's evaluated only > > if stop events ar

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-08 Thread Andrey Borodin
Hi Alexander! > 25 нояб. 2020 г., в 19:10, Alexander Korotkov > написал(а): > > In the code stop events are defined using macro STOPEVENT(event_id, params). > The 'params' should be a function call, and it's evaluated only if stop > events are enabled. pg_isolation_test_session_is_blocked()

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-07 Thread Alexander Korotkov
Hi! On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 9:10 AM Craig Ringer wrote: > On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 at 22:11, Alexander Korotkov wrote: >> PostgreSQL is a complex multi-process system, and we are periodically faced >> with complicated concurrency issues. While the postgres community does a >> great job on investigat

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-06 Thread Craig Ringer
On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 at 22:11, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Hackers, > > PostgreSQL is a complex multi-process system, and we are periodically > faced with complicated concurrency issues. While the postgres community > does a great job on investigating and fixing the problems, our ability to > repr

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-04 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:20 PM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Thank you for your feedback. We probably can't think over everything > in advance. We can start with configure option enabled for developers > and some buildfarm animals. That causes no risk of overhead in > standard builds. After some

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-04 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 9:57 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 6:11 AM Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > While the postgres community does a great job on investigating and fixing > > the problems, our ability to reproduce concurrency issues in the source > > code test suites is

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-04 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 9:29 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2020-Nov-25, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > In the view of above, I'd like to propose a POC patch, which implements new > > builtin infrastructure for reproduction of concurrency issues in automated > > test suites. The general idea is so-c

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-04 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 6:11 AM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > While the postgres community does a great job on investigating and fixing the > problems, our ability to reproduce concurrency issues in the source code test > suites is limited. +1. This seems really cool. > For sure, evaluation of s

Re: POC: Better infrastructure for automated testing of concurrency issues

2020-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On 2020-Nov-25, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > In the view of above, I'd like to propose a POC patch, which implements new > builtin infrastructure for reproduction of concurrency issues in automated > test suites. The general idea is so-called "stop events", which are > special places in the code,