Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1+4YDGubEASqSrZPsPDo12Ds4DmfXAROyLetdr_mp1SwA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 1:42 PM Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote: > > Hello Michaël, > > > The first failure is unrelated to the involved commits, as they touched > > completely different areas of the code: > > INSERT INTO hash_split_heap SELECT a/2 FROM generate_series(1, 25000) a; > > + WARNING: buffer refcount leak: [6481] (rel=base/16384/32349, blockNum=156, flags=0x93800000, refcount=1 1) > > > > And versions older than HEAD do not complain. > > > > Any thoughts? > > Both animals use gcc experimental versions, which may rather underline a > new bug in gcc head rather than an existing issue in pg. Or not. > It is possible, but what could be the possible theory? The warning indicates that somewhere we forgot to call ReleaseBuffer. Today, I had reviewed at the hash index code related to test case that is failing but didn't find any obvious problem. What should we our next step? Do we want to change gcc version and see? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: