On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 09:39:56AM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote: > What features in 9.4 need more beta testing for recovery? > > I've applied my partial-write testing harness to several scenarios in 9.4. So > far its found a recovery bug for gin indexes, a recovery bug for btree, a > vacuum bug for btree indexes (with foreign keys, but that is not relevant to > the bug), and nothing of interest for gist index, although it only tested > "where text_array @@ to_tsquery(?)" queries. > > It also implicitly tested the xlog parallel write slots thing, as that is > common code to all recovery. > > I also applied the foreign key test retroactively to 9.3, and it quickly > re-found the multixact bugs up until commit 9a57858f1103b89a5674. The test > was > designed only with the knowledge that the bugs involved foreign keys and the > consumption of multixacts. I had no deeper knowledge of the details of those > bugs when designing the test, so I have a reasonable amount of confidence that > this could have found them in real time had I bothered to try to test the > feature during the previous beta cycle.
Wow, that is impressive! We are looking for a ways to find bugs like the ones the appeared in 9.3.X, and it seems you might have found a way. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
