On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:48 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 4:38 AM, Thomas Munro > <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> To be able to do this, the patch modifies the isolation tester so that >> it recognises wait_event SafeSnapshot. > > I'm not going to say that's unacceptable, but it's certainly not beautiful.
Perhaps being able to define in an isolation spec a step called 'wait_event' with a value defined to the wait event to look for would make more sense? -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
