Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method
Date: 2005-08-08 23:59:00
Message-ID: 10527.1123545540@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> So the short answer is possibly "You build the tests and we'll run 'em."

The availability of the buildfarm certainly makes it a lot more feasible
to do performance tests on a variety of platforms. So, who wants to
knock something together?

I suppose we would usually be interested in one-time tests, rather than
something repeated every time CVS is touched. How might that sort of
requirement fit into the buildfarm software design?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-08-09 00:04:44 Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-08-08 23:50:01 Re: Solving the OID-collision problem