On 12/14/18 4:35 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > On 12/14/18 4:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> ... >> >> In general, I'm not particularly on board with our valgrind.supp >> carrying suppressions for code outside our own code base: I think >> that's assuming WAY too much about which version of what is installed >> on a particular box. >> > Fair point. > >> Maybe we could do something to make it simpler to have custom >> suppressions? Not sure what, though. >> > I was thinking that perhaps we could allows specifying path to extra > suppressions and pass that to valgrind. > > But we don't actually invoke valgrind, that's something people do on > their own anyway - so we don't have anywhere to pass the path to. And > whoever invokes valgrind can simply stick it directly into the command > they're using (as it allows specifying multiple --suppressions=<file> > options). Or perhaps just put it into ~/.valgrindrc. > > So perhaps we should simply revert that commit and be done with it. > > One place that will need to solve it is buildfarm client, but it could > pick either of the options I mentioned. > >
The buildfarm client has a parameter in the config file for valgrind options. All you would have to do is an an extra --suppressions setting in there. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
