From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andreas Seltenreich <seltenreich(at)gmx(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <rhaas(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [sqlsmith] Short reads in hash indexes |
Date: | 2016-12-08 02:25:48 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1Jk0xEdFT5BJqR2pxX-f+QFj1drFLUhHkhPZLAM6RTqvQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:38 AM, Andreas Seltenreich <seltenreich(at)gmx(dot)de> wrote:
> Andreas Seltenreich writes:
>
>> Amit Kapila writes:
>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Andreas Seltenreich <seltenreich(at)gmx(dot)de> wrote:
>>>> Amit Kapila writes:
>>>>
>>>>> [2. text/x-diff; fix_hash_bucketsplit_sqlsmith_v1.patch]
>>>> Ok, I'll do testing with the patch applied.
>>
>> Good news: the assertion hasn't fired since the patch is in.
>
> Meh, it fired again today after being silent for 100e6 queries :-/
> I guess I need to add some confidence qualification on such statements.
> Maybe sigmas as they do at CERN…
>
>> smith=# select * from state_report where sqlstate = 'XX001';
>> -[ RECORD 1 ]------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> count | 10
>> sqlstate | XX001
>> sample | ERROR: could not read block 1173 in file "base/16384/17256": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
>> hosts | {airbisquit,frell,gorgo,marbit,pillcrow,quakken}
>>
>>> Hmm, I am not sure if this is related to previous problem, but it
>>> could be. Is it possible to get the operation and or callstack for
>>> above failure?
>>
>> Ok, will turn the elog into an assertion to get at the backtraces.
>
> Doing so on top of 4212cb7, I caught the backtrace below. Query was:
>
Thanks for the report, I will look into it. I think this one is quite
similar to what Jeff has reported [1].
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2016-12-08 02:28:51 | Re: Back-patch use of unnamed POSIX semaphores for Linux? |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2016-12-08 02:25:24 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |