On 2017/06/23 15:07, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Thank you for updating the patch. It looks good to me. >> BTW I'm inclined to have a regression test case where doing 'make >> check' to the streaming replication environment with >> wal_consistency_check on standby server so that we can detect a bug >> around the wal. > > This would be very costly. A single run of the main regression tests > generates 15 to 20GB of FPWs if I recall correctly. Tiny buildfarm > members would suffer on that. *cough*
Initially, I had naively set wal_consistency_check = all before running make installcheck and then had to wait for a long time to confirm that WAL generated by the gin test indeed caused consistency check failure on the standby with the v1 patch. But I can see Sawada-san's point that there should be some way for developers writing code that better had gone through WAL consistency checking facility to do it without much hassle. But then again, it may not be that frequent to need that. Thanks, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
