Excerpts from Noah Misch's message of vie mar 11 12:51:14 -0300 2011: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 02:13:22AM -0500, Noah Misch wrote: > > Automated tests would go a long way toward building confidence that this > > patch > > does the right thing. Thanks to the SSI patch, we now have an in-tree test > > framework for testing interleaved transactions. The only thing it needs to > > be > > suitable for this work is a way to handle blocked commands. If you like, I > > can > > try to whip something up for that. > [off-list ACK followed] > > Here's a patch implementing that. It applies to master, with or without your > KEY LOCK patch also applied, though the expected outputs reflect the > improvements from your patch. I add three isolation test specs: > > fk-contention: blocking-only test case from your blog post > fk-deadlock: the deadlocking test case I used during patch review > fk-deadlock2: Joel Jacobson's deadlocking test case
Thanks for this patch. I have applied it, adjusting the expected output of these tests to the HEAD code. I'll adjust it when I commit the fklocks patch, I guess, but it seemed simpler to have it out of the way; besides it might end up benefitting other people who might be messing with the locking code. > I only support one waiting command at a time. As long as one commands > continues > to wait, I run other commands to completion synchronously. Should be fine for now, I guess. > I think this will work on Windows as well as pgbench does, but I haven't > verified that. We will find out shortly. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
