| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgbf(at)twiska(dot)com, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view |
| Date: | 2020-07-08 23:24:50 |
| Message-ID: | 1738875.1594250690@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2020-Jul-08, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The buildfarm's sparc64 members seem unhappy with this.
> Hmm. Some of them are, yeah, but it's not universal. For example
> mussurana and ibisbill are not showing failures.
Ah, right, I was thinking they hadn't run since this commit, but they
have.
> Anyway the error is pretty strange: only GetWALAvailability is showing a
> problem, but the size calculation in the view function def is returning
> a negative number, as expected.
We've previously noted what seem to be compiler optimization bugs on
both sparc32 and sparc64; the latest thread about that is
/message-id/flat/f28f842d-e82b-4e30-a81a-2a1f9fa4a8e1%40www.fastmail.com
This is looking uncomfortably like the same thing. Tom, could you
experiment with different -O levels on those animals?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-07-08 23:29:57 | Re: Is this a bug in pg_current_logfile() on Windows? |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2020-07-08 23:12:40 | Re: Is this a bug in pg_current_logfile() on Windows? |