Kyotaro, thanks for your corrections. I agree that wordings should be improved. But let’s deal with failures first.
> On 15 Mar 2024, at 10:28, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 10:42:35AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: >> In 005_timeouts.pl, I found the following comment. > > Note also that the test is not stable, one of my machines with > injection points enabled has complained twice in its last three runs: > https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=hachi&dt=2024-03-14%2015%3A05%3A04 > https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=hachi&dt=2024-03-15%2003%3A21%3A15 The failure is t/005_timeouts.pl (Wstat: 65280 Tests: 0 Failed: 0) Non-zero exit status: 255 Parse errors: No plan found in TAP output Files=5, Tests=68, 185 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.86 cusr 0.80 csys = 1.69 CPU) Result: FAIL The failure seems to be Perl-related. As far as I can see I’ve done everything akin to 041_checkpoint_at_promote.pl. On batta this test pass, but hachi seems to be unhappy with this test. And hachi sometimes pass this test too [0]. I’ll look more on this. Do I understand right that we have only 2 buildfarm members with injection points? Best regards, Andrey Borodin. [0] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=hachi&dt=2024-03-14%2022%3A02%3A41&stg=module-test_misc-check
