Re: longfin and tamandua aren't too happy but I'm not sure why
От | Dilip Kumar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: longfin and tamandua aren't too happy but I'm not sure why |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFiTN-ugn-bGNeh916zBmYmBW1_7zwNj8FBq9dvkjrHqFN+O_g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: longfin and tamandua aren't too happy but I'm not sure why (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: longfin and tamandua aren't too happy but I'm not sure why
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 10:45 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> writes: > > wrasse is also failing with a bus error, > > Yeah. At this point I think it's time to call for this patch > to get reverted. It should get tested *off line* on some > non-Intel, non-64-bit, alignment-picky architectures before > the rest of us have to deal with it any more. > > There may be a larger conversation to be had here about how > much our CI infrastructure should be detecting. There seems > to be a depressingly large gap between what that found and > what the buildfarm is finding --- not only in portability > issues, but in things like cpluspluscheck failures, which > I had supposed CI would find. Okay. Btw, I think the reason for the bus error on wrasse is the same as what is creating failure on longfin[1], I mean this unaligned access is causing Bus error during startup, IMHO. frame #0: 0x000000010a36af8c postgres`ParseCommitRecord(info='\x80', xlrec=0x00007fa06783a090, parsed=0x00007ff7b5c50040) at xactdesc.c:102:30 frame #1: 0x000000010a3cd24d postgres`xact_redo(record=0x00007fa0670096c8) at xact.c:6161:3 frame #2: 0x000000010a41770d postgres`ApplyWalRecord(xlogreader=0x00007fa0670096c8, record=0x00007fa06783a060, replayTLI=0x00007ff7b5c507f0) at xlogrecovery.c:1897:2 -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: