On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 7:13 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 1:24 PM John Naylor <john.nay...@2ndquadrant.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 9:27 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I think this test is going to break on nonstandard block sizes. While
> > > we don't promise that all tests work on such installs (particularly
> > > planner ones), it seems fairly easy to cope with this one -- just use a
> > > record size expressed as a fraction of current_setting('block_size').
> > > So instead of "1024" you'd write current_setting('block_size') / 8.
> > > And then display the relation size in terms of pages, not bytes, so
> > > divide pg_relation_size by block size.
> >
> > I've done this for v6, tested on 16k block size.
> >
>
> Thanks, the patch looks good to me. I have additionally tested it 32K
> and 1K sized blocks and the test passes. I will commit this early
> next week.
>
Pushed this patch. Last time, we have seen a few portability issues
with this test. Both John and me with the help of others tried to
ensure that there are no more such issues, but there is always a
chance that we missed something. Anyway, I will keep an eye on
buildfarm to see if there is any problem related to this patch.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
