Hi Hackers, On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 8:48 PM Himanshu Upadhyaya < upadhyaya.himan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The test if (pred_in_progress || TransactionIdDidCommit(curr_xmin)) >> seems wrong to me. Shouldn't it be &&? Has this code been tested at >> all? It doesn't seem to have a test case. Some of these other errors >> don't, either. Maybe there's some that we can't easily test in an >> automated way, but we should test what we can. I guess maybe casual >> testing wouldn't reveal the problem here because of the recheck, but >> it's worrying to find logic that doesn't look right with no >> corresponding comments or test cases. >> >> This is totally my Mistake, apologies for that. I will fix this in my > next patch. Regarding the missing test cases, I need one in-progress > transaction for these test cases to be included in 004_verify_heapam.pl > but I don't find a clear way to have an in-progress transaction(as per the > design of 004_verify_heapam.pl ) that I can use in the test cases. I will > be doing more research on a solution to add these missing test cases. > >> >> I am trying to add test cases related to in-progress transactions in 004_verify_heapam.pl but I am not able to find a proper way to achieve this. We have a logic where we manually corrupt each tuple. Please refer to the code just after the below comment in 004_verify_heapam.pl "# Corrupt the tuples, one type of corruption per tuple. Some types of # corruption cause verify_heapam to skip to the next tuple without # performing any remaining checks, so we can't exercise the system properly if # we focus all our corruption on a single tuple." Before this we stop the node by "$node->stop;" and then only we progress to manual corruption. This will abort all running/in-progress transactions. So, if we create an in-progress transaction and comment "$node->stop;" then somehow all the code that we have for manual corruption does not work. I think it is required to stop the server and then only proceed for manual corruption? If this is the case then please suggest if there is a way to get an in-progress transaction that we can use for manual corruption. -- Regards, Himanshu Upadhyaya EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
