Re: 039_end_of_wal: error in "xl_tot_len zero" test

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> Oh, it looks like this new build farm animal "skimmer" might be
> reminding us about this issue:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=skimmer&br=HEAD
> I don't know why it changed,

At this point it seems indisputable that 7d2c7f08d9 is what broke
skimmer, but that didn't go anywhere near WAL-related code, so how?

My best guess is that that changed the amount of WAL generated by
initdb just enough to make the problem reproduce on this animal.
However, why's it *only* happening on this animal?  The amount of
WAL we generate isn't all that system-specific.

            regards, tom lane