Skip to content

PG-2857 Follow up improvement for flacky tests - #851

Merged
artemgavrilov merged 2 commits into
release-2.4.1from
PG-2857-flaky-tests-followup
Oct 27, 2026
Merged

artemgavrilov merged 2 commits into
release-2.4.1from
PG-2857-flaky-tests-followup

Conversation

@artemgavrilov

@artemgavrilov artemgavrilov commented Oct 21, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

In histogram test filter our queriest that are not part of the test data.
In 013_settings_pgsm_normalized_query set max bucket size.
Remove timings check in shared blocks test

PG-0

Description

Links

In histogram test filter our queriest that are not part of the test
data.
In 013_settings_pgsm_normalized_query set max bucket size.
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Oct 21, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 88.49%. Comparing base (4426464) to head (3dcb18b).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on release-2.4.1.

Additional details and impacted files
@@              Coverage Diff               @@
##           release-2.4.1     #851   +/-   ##
==============================================
  Coverage          88.49%   88.49%           
==============================================
  Files                  3        3           
  Lines               1330     1330           
  Branches             196      196           
==============================================
  Hits                1177     1177           
  Misses                75       75           
  Partials              78       78           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@artemgavrilov
artemgavrilov changed the base branch from main to release-2.4.1 October 23, 2026 16:00
@artemgavrilov
artemgavrilov force-pushed the PG-2857-flaky-tests-followup branch from 7e27f8e to f7e454e Compare October 23, 2026 20:29

@jeltz jeltz left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not really a fan of either of the two latter commits.

  1. Doing it as a test runner hides it so the sleep is not properly attributed to the stupid test. I would rather that you fix the SQL or convert it into a TAP test.
  2. I am not convinced it makes sense to do that test like that at all. Why do we think we are guaranteed to get IO time at all, even for the relation extension? If anything we should just compare against PGSS and be done with it. This test feels to me like it was written by someone who does not understand IO in PostgreSQL. What does PGSS's tests do to test this?

Comment thread t/026_shared_blocks.pl Resolved
@artemgavrilov
artemgavrilov force-pushed the PG-2857-flaky-tests-followup branch 2 times, most recently from d65728e to b796fc4 Compare October 26, 2026 17:11
These timings are unpredicatble enough to be reliably tested
@artemgavrilov
artemgavrilov force-pushed the PG-2857-flaky-tests-followup branch from b796fc4 to 3dcb18b Compare October 26, 2026 17:18
@artemgavrilov
artemgavrilov merged commit 0e96fdd into release-2.4.1 Oct 27, 2026
31 of 36 checks passed
@artemgavrilov
artemgavrilov deleted the PG-2857-flaky-tests-followup branch October 27, 2026 08:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants