Re: [buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind

From: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind
Date: 2025-11-26 08:00:06
Message-ID: CANWCAZaH7a30cuu+OmM=DKBM_X8A2o=EO9G=zVLDsJTi12nBaQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 1:08 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
<kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> While seeing the buildfarm, I found that recently regression test for modules
> sometimes failed [1]. Typical example is [2] and failed at simd.h.
> The issue happened over branches, and they use gcc experimental. Based on that
> I felt recent commits for gcc might be related with.
>
> I don't have enough knowledge around here, but I saw commits in gcc and listed
> Candidates [4], [5], [6]. Can you find something from here?

We're not compiler engineers.

> Also, what should we do for nightly-built compilers? Will we fix tests or codes for them?

We might ask ourselves how often these have resulted in
forward-looking fixes for our code, weighed against spurious failures
and compiler bugs.

--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Geier 2025-11-26 08:15:35 Re: Performance issues with parallelism and LIMIT
Previous Message M.Atıf Ceylan 2025-11-26 07:48:52 [PATCH] psql: add size-based sorting options (O/o) for tables and indexes