On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Geoff Winkless writes:
>> While doing some testing of 9.5a one of my colleagues (not on list) found a
>> reproducible server segfault.
>
> Hm, looks like commit 1345cc67bbb014209714af32b5681b1e11eaf964 is to
> blame: memory management for the pl
Geoff Winkless writes:
> While doing some testing of 9.5a one of my colleagues (not on list) found a
> reproducible server segfault.
Hm, looks like commit 1345cc67bbb014209714af32b5681b1e11eaf964 is to
blame: memory management for the plpgsql cast cache needs to be more
complicated than I realize
On 17 July 2015 at 13:49, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Geoff Winkless
> wrote:
> > While doing some testing of 9.5a one of my colleagues (not on list)
> found a
> > reproducible server segfault.
> > [...]
> > Hope someone can get something useful from the above. Any
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Geoff Winkless wrote:
> While doing some testing of 9.5a one of my colleagues (not on list) found a
> reproducible server segfault.
> [...]
> Hope someone can get something useful from the above. Any questions, please
> ask.
A test case is more than enough to look
Hi all
While doing some testing of 9.5a one of my colleagues (not on list) found a
reproducible server segfault.
We've broken it down to a minimal script to reproduce below.
Reproduced on both machines on which we've installed 9.5 so far (both built
from source since we don't have any RHEL7 mach
