diff options
author | Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> | 2020-06-08 16:36:51 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> | 2020-06-18 14:06:23 -0700 |
commit | 59225dcefef278415aef64c3b96f84616b95661e (patch) | |
tree | beedcdbd97503387d350b31c0e757552700fdb39 /src/backend/executor/execParallel.c | |
parent | c10dc2d11791cc18ceea78caa94eb4b651090259 (diff) | |
download | postgresql-59225dcefef278415aef64c3b96f84616b95661e.tar.gz postgresql-59225dcefef278415aef64c3b96f84616b95661e.zip |
Add basic spinlock tests to regression tests.
As s_lock_test, the already existing test for spinlocks, isn't run in
an automated fashion (and doesn't test a normal backend environment),
adding tests that are run as part of a normal regression run is a good
idea. Particularly in light of several recent and upcoming spinlock
related fixes.
Currently the new tests are run as part of the pre-existing
test_atomic_ops() test. That perhaps can be quibbled about, but for
now seems ok.
The only operations that s_lock_test tests but the new tests don't are
the detection of a stuck spinlock and S_LOCK_FREE (which is otherwise
unused, not implemented on all platforms, and will be removed).
This currently contains a test for more than INT_MAX spinlocks (only
run with --disable-spinlocks), to ensure the recent commit fixing a
bug with more than INT_MAX spinlock initializations is correct. That
test is somewhat slow, so we might want to disable it after a few
days.
It might be worth retiring s_lock_test after this. The added coverage
of a stuck spinlock probably isn't worth the added complexity?
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200606023103.avzrctgv7476xj7i@alap3.anarazel.de
Diffstat (limited to 'src/backend/executor/execParallel.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions