On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 2:39 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > David Rowley <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > I did add the following query just before the failing one and included > > the expected output from below. The tests pass for me in make check > > and the post-upgrade test passes in make check-world too. I guess we > > could commit that and see if it fails along with the other mentioned > > failure. > > I'm thinking this is a good idea, although I think we could be more > aggressive about the data collected, as attached. Since all of these > ought to be single-page tables, the relpages and reltuples counts > should be machine-independent. In theory anyway.
Huh, idiacanthus failed showing vacuum_count 0, in select_parallel. So ... the VACUUM command somehow skipped those tables? -- Thomas Munro https://enterprisedb.com
