| From: | Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: failed NUMA pages inquiry status: Operation not permitted |
| Date: | 2026-01-06 13:23:33 |
| Message-ID: | CAKZiRmwV_O73DdSosD-k62kS2wWPc3C8mRZY8j9ozfOu5OLLjg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 5, 2026 at 11:30 PM Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> wrote:
>
> Re: Tomas Vondra
> > I guess the only solution is to accept -2 as a possible value (unknown
> > node). But that makes regression testing harder, because it means the
> > output could change a lot ...
Hi Tomas! That's pretty wild, nice find about that swapping s_b thing!
So just to confirm, that was reproduced outside containers/docker,
right?
> Or just not test that, or do something like
>
> select numa_node = -2 or numa_node between 0 and 1000 from pg_shmem_allocations_numa;
Well, with the huge-pages it should be not swappable, so another idea
would be simply alter first line of src/test/regress/sql/numa.sql and
sql/pg_buffercache_numa.sql just like below:
- SELECT NOT(pg_numa_available()) AS skip_test \gset
+ SELECT (pg_numa_available() is false OR
current_setting('huge_pages_status')::bool is false) as skip_test
\gset
(I'm making assumption that there are buildfarm animals that
huge_pages enabled, no idea how to check that)
-J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-01-06 15:36:15 | Re: failed NUMA pages inquiry status: Operation not permitted |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-01-06 11:25:35 | pgsql: Improve portability of new worker_spi test |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2026-01-06 13:25:39 | Re: [PATCH] Expose checkpoint reason to completion log messages. |
| Previous Message | Xuneng Zhou | 2026-01-06 13:12:41 | Re: Implement waiting for wal lsn replay: reloaded |