On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 07:40:57PM -0400, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > That's probably why it's not finding anything now: most people working > on something that touches WAL already know that testing their patch > with wal_consistency_checking early is a good idea. Of course it also > wouldn't be a bad idea to have a BF animal for that, especially > because we already have BF animals that test things far more niche > than this.
wal_consistency_checking has been enabled a couple of days ago on batta, and the runs are clean: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=batta&br=HEAD Recovery tests take a bit longer, but that's still OK on this host. For now, this mode only runs on HEAD. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
