On 2018-11-19 14:38:04 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 2018-11-19 17:32:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > FWIW, it seems that gcc's trunk works again. But I'm not sure this isn't
> > > just an accident and the optimization's introduced in the above revision
> >
Hi,
On 2018-11-19 17:32:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > FWIW, it seems that gcc's trunk works again. But I'm not sure this isn't
> > just an accident and the optimization's introduced in the above revision
> > aren't still broken.
> > https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bi
Andres Freund writes:
> FWIW, it seems that gcc's trunk works again. But I'm not sure this isn't
> just an accident and the optimization's introduced in the above revision
> aren't still broken.
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=moonjelly&br=HEAD
Yeah, I saw that moonj
Hi,
On 2018-11-01 22:52:19 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> > > > Their commit r265375 fixed the ability to compile itself, but built
> > > > PostgreSQL binaries remain broken there and thereafter.
> > > >
> > > > |...]
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot for this investigation! I can fill in a gcc bug rep
Their commit r265375 fixed the ability to compile itself, but built
PostgreSQL binaries remain broken there and thereafter.
|...]
Thanks a lot for this investigation! I can fill in a gcc bug report. There
would be a enormous work to narrow it down to a small test case, it is
unclear how they
On 2018-10-27 08:18:12 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello Jeff,
>
> > > I suspect the easiest thing to narrow it down would be to bisect the
> > > problem in gcc :(
> >
> > Their commit r265241 is what broke the PostgreSQL build. It also broke the
> > compiler itself--at that commit it was n
Hello Jeff,
I suspect the easiest thing to narrow it down would be to bisect the
problem in gcc :(
Their commit r265241 is what broke the PostgreSQL build. It also broke the
compiler itself--at that commit it was no longer possible to build itself.
I had to --disable-bootstrap in order to g
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 10:51 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-10-23 13:54:31 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> >
> > Hello Tom & Amit,
> >
> > > > > 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.
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 07:50:57AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> FWIW, my animal 'serinus', which runs debian's gcc-snapshot shows the same
> problem:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=serinus&dt=2018-10-22%2006%3A34%3A02
>
> So it seems much more likely to be 1).
Thanks
On 2018-10-23 13:54:31 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello Tom & Amit,
>
> > > > 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?
>
Hello Tom & Amit,
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?
It seems like the two feasible theories are (1) gcc bug, or (2) buffer
leak th
Amit Kapila writes:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 1:42 PM Fabien COELHO wrote:
>> 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?
It seems like the t
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 1:42 PM Fabien COELHO 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 ref
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=0x938
Hi all,
Looking at the buildfarm, serinus and moonjelly have just complained
about the failure of $subject:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=serinus&dt=2018-10-22%2006%3A34%3A02
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=moonjelly&dt=2018-10-20%2015%3A17%3A02
T
15 matches
Mail list logo
