8000 Sleep after killing server in replication test by AndersAstrand · Pull Request #348 · percona/postgres · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

Sleep after killing server in replication test #348

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Sleep after killing server in replication test #348

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

AndersAstrand
Copy link
Collaborator
@AndersAstrand AndersAstrand commented May 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

This test often failed in CI, and I believe the cause is that we tried to start the cluster again before it had been fully killed.

2025-05-19 16:52:15.366 UTC [17639] 012_replication.pl LOG:  statement: ALTER SYSTEM SET pg_tde.wal_encrypt = 'on';
2025-05-19 16:52:15.418 UTC [17643] FATAL:  pre-existing shared memory block (key 341122, ID 34) is still in use
2025-05-19 16:52:15.418 UTC [17643] HINT:  Terminate any old server processes associated with data directory "/home/runner/work/postgres/postgres/contrib/pg_tde/tmp_check/t_012_replication_primary_data/pgdata".

@codecov-commenter
Copy link
codecov-commenter commented May 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 80.49%. Comparing base (2d944d5) to head (8cc554f).

❌ Your project status has failed because the head coverage (80.49%) is below the target coverage (90.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@                Coverage Diff                 @@
##           TDE_REL_17_STABLE     #348   +/-   ##
==================================================
  Coverage              80.49%   80.49%           
==================================================
  Files                     22       22           
  Lines                   2604     2604           
  Branches                 398      398           
==================================================
  Hits                    2096     2096           
  Misses                   430      430           
  Partials                  78       78
Components Coverage Δ
access 82.95% <ø> (ø)
catalog 87.55% <ø> (ø)
common 91.80% <ø> (ø)
encryption 75.47% <ø> (ø)
keyring 72.00% <ø> (ø)
src 66.74% <ø> (ø)
smgr 97.27% <ø> (ø)
transam ∅ <ø> (∅)
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@AndersAstrand
Sleep after killing server in replication test
8cc554f 
This test often failed in CI, and I believe the cause is that we tried
to start the cluster again before it had been fully killed.
@AndersAstrand AndersAstrand force-pushed the tde/see-if-sleep-fixes-codecov-failure branch from 557f355 to 8cc554f Compare May 19, 2025 17:19
@AndersAstrand
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Here is how a postgres test deals with the same issue of not being able to start the cluster immediately after kill -9. Seems a little overkill for our uses though. https://github.com/percona/postgres/blob/TDE_REL_17_STABLE/src/test/recovery/t/017_shm.pl#L187-L216

@AndersAstrand AndersAstrand marked this pull request as ready for review May 19, 2025 17:23
This was referenced May 19, 2025
Closed
Merged
@AndersAstrand AndersAstrand deleted the tde/see-if-sleep-fixes-codecov-failure branch May 20, 2025 07:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dutow dutow Awaiting requested review from dutow dutow is a code owner

@dAdAbird dAdAbird Awaiting requested review from dAdAbird dAdAbird is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@AndersAstrand @codecov-commenter
0