On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 2:30 PM Alexander Lakhin <exclus...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 06.02.2024 09:48, Amit Kapila wrote: > > cool, is it possible to see whether this patch changes the runtime of > > this test in any noticeable way? > > > > Yes, unfortunately it does. > I've measured duration of 100 tests runs without the patch (with pristine > bgwriter and with NO_TEMP_INSTALL): > real 6m46,031s > real 6m52,406s > real 6m51,014s > > But with the patched test, I've got: > real 9m39,872s > real 9m40,044s > real 9m38,236s > (nearly 2 seconds increase per one test run) > > Under Valgrind, the original test run takes: > Files=1, Tests=36, 334 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.00 sys + 163.14 cusr > 7.98 csys = 171.14 CPU) > > But the patched one: > Files=1, Tests=36, 368 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.00 sys + 182.16 cusr > 8.90 csys = 191.08 CPU) > (30 seconds increase) >
Yeah, I was worried about that. The other idea I have previously thought was to change Alter Subscription to Drop+Create Subscription. That should also help in bringing stability without losing any functionality. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.