Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only)
От | Noah Misch |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20160707073402.GA1690813@tornado.leadboat.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only) (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only)
Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only) Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for a status update. On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 08:47:20PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > In the interest of clarity, I was not intending to say that there > > should be a regression test in the patch. I was intending to say that > > there should be a test case with the bug report. I'm not opposed to > > adding a regression test, and I like the idea of attempting to do so > > while requiring only a relatively small amount of data by changing > > maintenance_work_mem, but that wasn't the target at which I was > > aiming. Nevertheless, carry on. > > How do you feel about adding testing to tuplesort.c not limited to > hitting this bug (when Valgrind memcheck is used)? Sounds great, but again, not in the patch fixing this bug. > Are you satisfied that I have adequately described steps to reproduce? I can confirm that (after 62 minutes) your test procedure reached SIGSEGV today and then completed successfully with your patch.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: