On 17/12/14 10:11, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
Your new version 1.7 of the patches fixes that issue, as well as the OID
conflict.
Good.
You're probably aware that I maintain a stress testing suite for the
patch here: https://github.com/petergeoghegan/upsert
In the past, you've had a lot of success with coming up with stress
tests that find bugs. Maybe you can come up with some improvements to
the suite, if you'd care to test the patch. I can authorize your
Github account to push code to that repo, if you're interested.
Yeah!
I have just released a prototype software (not related to pg): I'm going
to tell them to treat it with extreme suspicion, no matter how much they
may respect the developer (me)!
Though like Pg, it is critical that it records data with reliability.
Also, both need testing to try and detect intermittent errors (I already
found one myself in the prototype - fortunately, not so critical it
needs to be fixed in the prototype, but would have to be eliminated from
the production version!).
So I think it really great to encourage people to come up with demanding
tests, especially automated stress testing for pg.
Cheers,
Gavin
(Who wishes he had the time & experience to contribute to pg.)
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
