| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |
| Date: | 2020-10-26 14:13:15 |
| Message-ID: | 684773.1603721595@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 9:56 AM Mark Dilger
> <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> hornet is still unhappy even after
>>> 321633e17b07968e68ca5341429e2c8bbf15c331?
>> That appears to be a failed test for pg_surgery rather than for amcheck. Or am I reading the log wrong?
> Oh, yeah, you're right. I don't know why it just failed now, though:
> there are a bunch of successful runs preceding it. But I guess it's
> unrelated to this thread.
pg_surgery's been unstable since it went in. I believe Andres is
working on a fix.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2020-10-26 14:22:02 | Re: libpq compression |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2020-10-26 14:08:12 | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |