Horton

Re: stress test for parallel workers

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>, Mark Wong <mark@2ndquadrant.com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-12-11T02:22:41Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 4:50 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Filed at
> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205183

For the curious-and-not-subscribed, there's now a kernel patch
proposed for this.  We guessed pretty close, but the problem wasn't
those dodgy looking magic numbers, it was that the bad stack expansion
check only allows for user space to expand the stack
(FAULT_FLAG_USER), and here the kernel itself wants to build a stack
frame.

Commits

  1. In the postmaster, rely on the signal infrastructure to block signals.

  2. Paper over regression failures in infinite_recurse() on PPC64 Linux.

  3. Hack pg_ctl to report postmaster's exit status.

  4. Re-order some regression test scripts for more parallelism.