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
-
Fix uninitialized value in segno calculation
- b5b4c0fef9fb 14.0 landed
- 794e8e32bb5a 13.0 landed
-
Morph pg_replication_slots.min_safe_lsn to safe_wal_size
- c54b5891f415 13.0 landed
- a8aaa0c786b3 14.0 landed