| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: problems on Solaris |
| Date: | 2015-05-26 02:05:12 |
| Message-ID: | 20150526020512.GT32396@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-05-25 09:12:35 +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> On 05/25/2015 03:17 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2015-05-24 21:01:54 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >> Yes, but it wasn't running these tests until a few days ago when its
> >> buildfarm software was upgraded.
> >
> > But barriers are used in other places too...
>
> fwiw: spoonbill just failed in the same part of the regression tests
> (and it is a Sparc64 box though not running solaris):
>
>
> http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=spoonbill&dt=2015-05-24%2023%3A00%3A07
With a quite different error though: PANIC: ERRORDATA_STACK_SIZE exceeded
Hm. So we have a *occasional* stack size exceeded failure and an
occasional spinlock error in test_shm_mq. I'm inclined to think that
this is a shm_mq problem, and not a more general locking problem - it
seems likely, but not guaranteed, that that'd have materialized
elsewhere.
Robert: IIRC there was some problems with shm_mq tests being stuck
before, right?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2015-05-26 02:15:30 | Re: Asynchronous DRAM Self-Refresh |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-26 02:03:59 | Re: Run pgindent now? |