Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgbf@twiska.com, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>, masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2020-07-08T23:24:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.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
https://www.postgresql.org/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



Commits

  1. Fix uninitialized value in segno calculation

  2. Morph pg_replication_slots.min_safe_lsn to safe_wal_size