| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Replication lag tracking for walsenders |
| Date: | 2017-04-22 16:37:50 |
| Message-ID: | 10248.1492879070@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> So 6 of 15 critters are getting the walsender.c assertion,
> and those six plus six more are seeing the subtrans.c one,
> and three are seeing neither one. There's probably a pattern
> to that, don't know what it is.
Ah, got it: skink *is* seeing the subtrans.c assertion, but not
the other. (I'd forgotten to limit the query to the HEAD branch,
and it was looking at 9.6 for skink.) hamster, as stated, isn't
giving us a recent report; and crake is running the test but it
doesn't use --enable-cassert, hence no TRAP.
So actually, every single buildfarm member that could be reporting
the subtrans.c crash is doing so. But only about half of them are
reporting the walsender.c crash.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-04-22 18:40:28 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Replication lag tracking for walsenders |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-04-22 16:27:35 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Replication lag tracking for walsenders |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pierre Ducroquet | 2017-04-22 16:46:26 | Re: Small patch for pg_basebackup argument parsing |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-04-22 16:27:35 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Replication lag tracking for walsenders |