Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Amit Kapila
Тема Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks
Дата
Msg-id CAA4eK1+4YDGubEASqSrZPsPDo12Ds4DmfXAROyLetdr_mp1SwA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Ответы Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 1:42 PM Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
>
> Hello Michaël,
>
> > The first failure is unrelated to the involved commits, as they touched
> > completely different areas of the code:
> >  INSERT INTO hash_split_heap SELECT a/2 FROM generate_series(1, 25000) a;
> > + WARNING:  buffer refcount leak: [6481] (rel=base/16384/32349, blockNum=156, flags=0x93800000, refcount=1 1)
> >
> > And versions older than HEAD do not complain.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
>
> Both animals use gcc experimental versions, which may rather underline a
> new bug in gcc head rather than an existing issue in pg. Or not.
>

It is possible, but what could be the possible theory?  The warning
indicates that somewhere we forgot to call ReleaseBuffer.  Today, I
had reviewed at the hash index code related to test case that is
failing but didn't find any obvious problem.  What should we our next
step?  Do we want to change gcc version and see?


--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrey Lepikhov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Making all nbtree entries unique by having heap TIDs participatein comparisons
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Buildfarm failures for hash indexes: buffer leaks