| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: isolation check takes a long time |
| Date: | 2012-07-24 06:02:19 |
| Message-ID: | 14553.1343109739@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On fre, 2012-07-20 at 13:15 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> Meanwhile, I would like to remove the prepared_transactions test from
>>> the main isolation schedule, and add a new Make target which runs that
>>> test explicitly. Is there any objection to that?
> Why was this backpatched to 9.1? That doesn't seem appropriate.
AIUI the point was to cut the load on buildfarm machines, so it won't
help (as much) if it's only applied to a subset of the branches that
have this test. In any case, I don't follow your objection. Removing
regression tests from stable branches is probably safer than removing
them from HEAD.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2012-07-24 13:33:26 | Re: Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) |
| Previous Message | Kohei KaiGai | 2012-07-24 05:24:11 | ALTER command reworks |