Re: Re-add recently-removed tests for ltree and intarray

From: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re-add recently-removed tests for ltree and intarray
Date: 2026-05-15 06:33:53
Message-ID: CANWCAZbEdaQzoseZ=_8mxjP7nNS0YPrDB_dQay+HuWxd6W6LRA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 9:49 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > FWIW, I tried to reproduce with the former new tests un-reverted, and
> > didn't see stack overflow on the following, so unless I fat-fingered
> > that I wonder if there's something more specific on the previously
> > failing members:
>
> > ppc64le / gcc 8.5 / Linux kernel 4.18
> > S390X / gcc 13.3 / Linux kernel 6.8
>
> Hm, did you use -O0 ?

I just now tried -O0 on yesterday's master with ppc64le, with the
previous new tests re-added, and it did fail. Then, pulled in master
with the tests just now committed, and it passed.

--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message shveta malik 2026-05-15 06:36:19 Re: Bound memory usage during manual slot sync retries
Previous Message Soumya S Murali 2026-05-15 06:27:28 Re: [PATCH] Expose checkpoint timestamp and duration in pg_stat_checkpointer