On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 11:03 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 5:16 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Based on the off list discussion, I have modified the test based on > > the idea showed in > > "isolation/specs/insert-conflict-specconflict.spec", other open point > > we had about the race condition that how to ensure that when we unlock > > any session it make progress, IMHO the isolation tested is designed in > > a way that either all the waiting session returns with the output or > > again block on a heavy weight lock before performing the next step. > > > > Few comments: > 1. The test has a lot of similarities and test duplication with what > we are doing in insert-conflict-specconflict.spec. Can we move it to > insert-conflict-specconflict.spec? I understand that having it in > test_decoding has the advantage that we can have all decoding tests in > one place but OTOH, we can avoid a lot of test-code duplication if we > add it in insert-conflict-specconflict.spec. > > It seems the isolation test runs on the default configuration, will it be a good idea to change the wal_level to logical for the whole isolation tester folder? -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
