On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 09:25:43AM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> Thanks a lot, Michael.
So.. The buildfarm members running on Windows and running the
recovery tests are jacana (MinGW) and fairywren (Msys), both reporting
green. drongo (MSVC) skips those tests, but I have tested MSVC by
myself so I th
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 7:24 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 02:20:50PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > ok(!-f $recovery_end_command_file,
> > - 'recovery_end_command executed after promotion');
> > + 'recovery_end_command not executed yet');
> > Indeed :p
>
> While lo
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 02:20:50PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> ok(!-f $recovery_end_command_file,
> - 'recovery_end_command executed after promotion');
> + 'recovery_end_command not executed yet');
> Indeed :p
While looking at that this morning, I have noticed an extra bug. If
the path o
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 10:32:22AM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> Thanks for the updated version. The patch is much better than before
> except needing minor changes to the test description that testing
> recovery_end_command_file before promotion, I did the same in the
> attached version.
ok(!-f $reco
n this test so we
> are better without for now IMO.
>
> perltidy was also complaining a bit, this is fixed as of the attached.
> I have checked things on my own Windows dev box, while on it.
Thanks for the updated version. The patch is much better than before
except needing minor changes to the test description that testing
recovery_end_command_file before promotion, I did the same in the
attached version.
Regards,
Amul
v7-0001-TAP-test-for-recovery_end_command-and-archive_cle.patch
Description: Binary data
are better without for now IMO.
perltidy was also complaining a bit, this is fixed as of the attached.
I have checked things on my own Windows dev box, while on it.
--
Michael
From 01629266d79bca20b3b653ce8c59062ef7187515 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michael Paquier
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 12:59
;");
> I am wondering how this finishes on Windows.
My colleague Neha Sharma has confirmed that the attached version is
passing on the Windows.
Regards,
Amul
From a340aaaf9298e6adfd322afb82f825f296650375 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Amul Sul
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 03:38:25 -0400
Subject:
On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 06:49:10PM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion, added the same in the attached version.
Hmm. The run-time of 020_archive_status.p bumps from 4.7s to 5.8s on
my laptop, so the change is noticeable. I agree that it would be good
to have more coverage for thos
On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 1:40 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-09-14 10:34:09 +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> > +# recovery_end_command_file executed only on recovery end which can happen
> > on
> > +# promotion.
> > +$standby3->promote;
> > +ok(-f "$recovery_end_command_file",
> > + 'recov
Hi,
On 2021-09-14 10:34:09 +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> +# recovery_end_command_file executed only on recovery end which can happen on
> +# promotion.
> +$standby3->promote;
> +ok(-f "$recovery_end_command_file",
> + 'recovery_end_command executed after promotion');
It'd be good to test what happ
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 8:39 PM Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021, at 10:09 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
>
> Yeah, added that test too. I triggered the restartpoint via a
> CHECKPOINT command in the attached version.
>
> +# archive_cleanup_command executed with every restart points
> +ok( !-f "
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021, at 10:09 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
> Yeah, added that test too. I triggered the restartpoint via a
> CHECKPOINT command in the attached version.
+# archive_cleanup_command executed with every restart points
+ok( !-f "$archive_cleanup_command_file",
+ 'archive_cleanup_command not exe
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 5:56 AM Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021, at 8:18 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
>
> The attached patch adds a small test for recovery_end_command execution.
>
> Additional coverage is always a good thing.
>
Thanks for the confirmation.
> Currently, patch tests execution
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 8:44 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 09:25:32PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021, at 8:18 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
> >> Also, we don't have a good test for archive_cleanup_command as well, I
> >> am not sure how we could test that which e
On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 09:25:32PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021, at 8:18 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
>> Also, we don't have a good test for archive_cleanup_command as well, I
>> am not sure how we could test that which executes with every
>> restart-point.
>
> Setup a replica and stop
On Thu, Sep 9, 2021, at 8:18 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
> The attached patch adds a small test for recovery_end_command execution.
Additional coverage is always a good thing.
> Currently, patch tests execution of recovery_end_command by creating
> dummy file, I am not wedded only to this approach, other
Hi,
The attached patch adds a small test for recovery_end_command execution.
Currently, patch tests execution of recovery_end_command by creating
dummy file, I am not wedded only to this approach, other suggestions
also welcome.
Also, we don't have a good test for archive_cleanup_command as well
17 matches
Mail list logo
