On 12/14/18 4:35 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 12/14/18 4:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> In general, I'm not particularly on board with our valgrind.supp
>> carrying suppressions for code outside our own code base: I think
>> that's assuming WAY too much about which version of what is installed
>> on a particular box.
>>
> Fair point.
>
>> Maybe we could do something to make it simpler to have custom
>> suppressions? Not sure what, though.
>>
> I was thinking that perhaps we could allows specifying path to extra
> suppressions and pass that to valgrind.
>
> But we don't actually invoke valgrind, that's something people do on
> their own anyway - so we don't have anywhere to pass the path to. And
> whoever invokes valgrind can simply stick it directly into the command
> they're using (as it allows specifying multiple --suppressions=<file>
> options). Or perhaps just put it into ~/.valgrindrc.
>
> So perhaps we should simply revert that commit and be done with it.
>
> One place that will need to solve it is buildfarm client, but it could
> pick either of the options I mentioned.
>
>
The buildfarm client has a parameter in the config file for valgrind
options. All you would have to do is an an extra --suppressions setting
in there.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services