> On 23 Sep 2026, at 12:15, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Sept 2026 at 00:38, Zsolt Parragi <[email protected]> > wrote:
>> Shouldn't 021 get the same fix (0001)? That's only executed with >> checksum_extended so its not that visible on CI, but it has the same >> issue. > > Yes, you are right. I realized that we can do the same thing for all > test_checksum tests, so I applied similar change to all of the related > checksum tests in 0001. I've been looking at this patch and have tested it extensively both on local hardware and CI instances. Copilot review pointed out one thing which I think is accurate (though unlikely to happen), if the START WAL LOCATION and CHECKPOINT LOCATION straddle segments then the test would fail. Extracting the WAL filename from $shutdown_ckpt is the safer option. That fix and some commit message tweaking are the only changes in the attached v4. -- Daniel Gustafsson
v4-0001-Avoid-idle-WAL-waits-in-checksum-tests.patch
Description: Binary data
v4-0002-Fix-WAL-file-selection-in-013_rewind-test.patch
Description: Binary data
