On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> So at this point I've got serious doubts as to the quality of testing of >>> that whole patch, not just this part. > >> I tested the case where we skip a block during the first pass, but I >> admit that I punted on testing the case where we skip a block during >> the second pass, because I couldn't think of a good way to exercise >> it. Any suggestions? > > Hack ConditionalLockBufferForCleanup to have a 50% probability of > failure regardless of anything else, for instance via > > static int ctr = 0; > > if ((++ctr) % 2) > return false;
Oh, that's brilliant. OK, I'll go try that. Note to self: Try to remember to take that hack back out before committing. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
