On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 2:38 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Willian Colognesi <willian_cologn...@trimble.com> writes: > > `I take it things were okay with the version you used previously?` > > > Yes, it was working pretty well in another instance with pg version > > `12.4-1.pgdg18.04+1`, and we had to make a migration of one database that > > was running in this server to another using Logical Replication. > > 12.4 to 14.5 is kind of a big jump :-(. > > The stack trace seems to indicate that ExecProcNode transferred control > to never-never land, which says that something clobbered the function > pointer it's trying to indirect through. I don't recall having seen > any similar reports though.
I'm just thinking out loud... I've seen the latest GCC do that on what it believes to be dead code. Our problem was detailed at https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/1141 . We identified the problem by building/running our self tests with -fsanitize=unreachable . Testing with -fsanitize=unreachable should confirm or rule out GCC and Clang [incorrectly] removing code that is actually needed. If this is the problem, then -fsanitize=unreachable will also provide a usable stack trace and provide a useful debugging experience. Jeff
