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

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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 04:59:35
Message-ID: agaoN-5TsppW5aMH@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 10:49:38PM -0400, Tom Lane 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 ?

Yeah, that should matter. I don't immediately see why the new tests
should fail at hand.. And unfortunately I don't have these
environments at hand to double-check things, so I think that I am
going to take a bet on HEAD. Then if things work, do a backpatch.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yugo Nagata 2026-05-15 05:03:02 Re: Track skipped tables during autovacuum and autoanalyze
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2026-05-15 04:55:17 Re: postgres_fdw: restore_stats uses current user's mapping instead of table owner's during ANALYZE