Thread: Failure in TAP tests of pg_ctl on Windows with parallel instance set

Hi all,

I have run the TAP tests with an instance of Postgres locally set at
port 5432 on Windows, to notice that 001_start_stop.pl fails various
tests because the test tries to use the default port for the node
initialized with pg_ctl.  The problem can get fixed easily by
assigning a random port number to that instance.

It could potentially become a problem if parallel TAP tests run in
parallel on Windows while initializing the node because of a port
conflict, but that's actually already a problem now for all the tests
as all nodes listen to 127.0.0.1 in this case.  This cannot happen on
*nix simply because we use a unique unix domain path, so even if ports
conflict things are able to work.

Attached is a patch to fix this issue, that I would like to
back-patch down to 9.4 where the issue can show up.

Any objections?
--
Michael

On 12/1/19 10:14 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have run the TAP tests with an instance of Postgres locally set at
> port 5432 on Windows, to notice that 001_start_stop.pl fails various
> tests because the test tries to use the default port for the node
> initialized with pg_ctl.  The problem can get fixed easily by
> assigning a random port number to that instance.
>
> It could potentially become a problem if parallel TAP tests run in
> parallel on Windows while initializing the node because of a port
> conflict, but that's actually already a problem now for all the tests
> as all nodes listen to 127.0.0.1 in this case.  This cannot happen on
> *nix simply because we use a unique unix domain path, so even if ports
> conflict things are able to work. 
>
> Attached is a patch to fix this issue, that I would like to
> back-patch down to 9.4 where the issue can show up.
>
> Any objections?



Looks reasonable. I wonder if there are other test sets where we need to
set the port.


cheers


andrew

-- 
Andrew Dunstan                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 07:57:31AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Looks reasonable.

Thanks, committed and back-patched down to 11, which is where we have
PostgresNode::get_free_port.  This could go further down with more
refactoring of PostgresNode.pm but as it took a long time to find this
issue that does not seem really worth the extra legwork.

> I wonder if there are other test sets where we need to set the port.

I looked at that before sending the first email, with the tests of
initdb and pg_basebackup potentially breaking stuff, but we never
initialize (direct initdb) and then start a node without
PostgresNode.pm.  So we are fine as far as I saw.
--
Michael