Hi, On 2022-04-08 17:55:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > After seeing skink's results, I tried running that test under valgrind > here, and it fails just like that every time. skink's history allows > us to bound the failure introduction between 79b716cfb7 and > d7ab2a9a3c, which I think makes it just about certain that it was > 5dc0418fab (Prefetch data referenced by the WAL, take II), though I've > not bisected to be 100% sure.
I've tested it, it's 5dc0418fab that makes the difference. I reduced the cycle time by making initdb not go through valgrind, but have normal postgres instances go through it. > On the whole, I'm not sure that the WAL prefetch logic is noticeably > more stable than when we booted it out last year :-(. IDK. Last year's issues seems to have largely been caused by a flaky machine. And a bug, if it's that, in some archiving corner case that's not normally reached during tests... Greetings, Andres Freund
