Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 10:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > How much testing of this patch's concurrent behavior has been done? > > I'm wondering if any other locking thinkos are in there ... > > This version of HOT is being developed from scratch, with as much > feedback from the community as possible. The idea was to build it up > brick by brick, so that each assumption/decision could be challenged as > we go. The idea was to avoid a huge review at the end, which could lead > to a fatal flaw being discovered too late to make the release.
Yes, as Joshua Drake said, HOT is a model of how to develop complex patches in the community. > The right kind of testing is clearly going to be important to getting > HOT right. Back in July, we spent some time building concurrent psql > specifically to allow test cases to be written that referenced multiple > sessions. Even if we don't like that thought for production, it would be > great to be able to have a tool that allowed multi-session test cases to > be written. Experience was that it was much, much easier to get a test > case written in a single script where you could easily read the > statement history. Yes, I am assuming we are getting the concurrent psql patch in 8.3. It was stalled because we were waiting for regression tests and use illustrations. > > It would also be very useful to have a version of pgstattuple that > worked with heaps, so test cases can be written that examine the header > fields, info flags etc. It would be useful to be able to specify the > basic behaviour in terms of explicit test cases. > > Would those two approaches to test execution be desirable in the > regression tests? Sure. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster