Hello Sokolov. At Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:19:23 +0300, Sokolov Yura <funny.fal...@postgrespro.ru> wrote in <d076dae18b437be89c787a854034f...@postgrespro.ru> > I don't want to make test to lasts so long and generate so many data. > That is why I used such small timeouts for tests.
I understand your point, but still *I* think such a short timeout is out of expectation by design. (But it can be set.) Does anyone have opinions on this? > Test is failing if there is "short quit" after > `!pq_is_send_pending()`, > so I doubt your patch will pass the test. It is because I think that the test "should" fail since the timeout is out of expected range. I (and perhaps also Petr) is thinking that the problem is just that a large transaction causes a timeout with an ordinary timeout. My test case is based on the assumption. Your test is for a timeout during replication-startup with extremely short timeout. This may be a different problem to discuss, but perhaps better to be solved together. I'd like to have opnions from others on this point. > And you've change calculated sleep time with sane waiting on all > insteresting events (using WaitLatchOrSocket) to semi-busy loop. > It at least could affect throughput. Uggh! I misunderstood there. It wais for writing socket so the sleep is wrong and WaitLatchOrSocket is right. After all, I put +1 for Petr's latest patch. Sorry for my carelessness. > And why did you remove `SetLatch(MyLatch)` in the end of function? > Probably this change is correct, but not obvious. Latch is needless there if it waited a fixed duration, but if it waits writefd events there, also latch should be waited. > > Any thoughts? > > It certainly could be my test and my patch is wrong. But my point > is that test should be written first. Especially for such difficult > case. Without test it is impossible to say does our patches fix > something. And it is impossible to say if patch does something > wrong. And impossible to say if patch fixes this problem but > introduce new problem. > > Please, write test for your remarks. If you think, my patch breaks > something, write test for the case my patch did broke. If you think > my test is wrong, write your test that is more correct. > > Without tests it will be just bird's hubbub. regards, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
