On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 2:33 PM Thomas Munro
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:00 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > The below code seems to be problemetic:
> > dsm_cleanup_using_control_segment()
> > {
> > ..
> > if (!dsm_control_segment_sane(old_control, mapped_size))
> > {
> > dsm_impl_op(DSM_OP_DET
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:00 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> The below code seems to be problemetic:
> dsm_cleanup_using_control_segment()
> {
> ..
> if (!dsm_control_segment_sane(old_control, mapped_size))
> {
> dsm_impl_op(DSM_OP_DETACH, old_control_handle, 0, &impl_private,
> &mapped_address, &mapped_s
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 6:02 PM Larry Rosenman wrote:
> Let me know soon(ish) if any of you want to poke at this machine, as I'm
> likely to forget and reboot it.
Hi Larry,
Thanks for the offer but it looks like there is no way to get our
hands on that memory for forensics now. I'll see if
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 08:19:52PM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 02:17:14PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 1:10 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > > ... However, I'm still slightly interested in how it
> > > was that that broke DSM so thoroughly ...
> >
> > Me
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 6:30 AM Thomas Munro
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:08 AM Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:43 AM Thomas Munro
> > wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:00 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > I would argue that both dsm_postmaster_shutdown and
> > > > d
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 2:36 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Larry's REL_10_STABLE failure logs are interesting:
>
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=peripatus&dt=2018-10-17%2020%3A42%3A17
>
> 2018-10-17 15:48:08.849 CDT [55240:7] LOG: dynamic shared memory control
> segment is corru
Thomas Munro writes:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 1:10 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... However, I'm still slightly interested in how it
>> was that that broke DSM so thoroughly ...
> Me too. Frustratingly, that vm object might still exist on Larry's
> machine if it hasn't been rebooted (since we failed
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 02:17:14PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 1:10 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > ... However, I'm still slightly interested in how it
> > was that that broke DSM so thoroughly ...
>
> Me too. Frustratingly, that vm object might still exist on Larry's
> machine
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 1:10 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> ... However, I'm still slightly interested in how it
> was that that broke DSM so thoroughly ...
Me too. Frustratingly, that vm object might still exist on Larry's
machine if it hasn't been rebooted (since we failed to shm_unlink()
it), so if we
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 08:55:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Larry Rosenman writes:
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 08:10:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> However, I'm still slightly interested in how it
> >> was that that broke DSM so thoroughly ... I pulled down your version of
> >> python2.7 and wil
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:08 AM Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:43 AM Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:00 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > > I would argue that both dsm_postmaster_shutdown and dsm_postmaster_startup
> > > are broken here; the former because it makes no
Larry Rosenman writes:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 08:10:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> However, I'm still slightly interested in how it
>> was that that broke DSM so thoroughly ... I pulled down your version of
>> python2.7 and will see if that reproduces it.
> It was built on a previous alpha, so
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 08:10:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Larry Rosenman writes:
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 07:07:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> ... Was your Python install built
> >> with any special switches? I just used what came from "pkg install".
>
> > It had been built on a previous
Larry Rosenman writes:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 07:07:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... Was your Python install built
>> with any special switches? I just used what came from "pkg install".
> It had been built on a previous FreeBSD build, I have my own poudriere
> infrastructure. I can probab
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 07:07:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Larry Rosenman writes:
> > On the original failure, I recompiled and reinstalled the 2 Python's I
> > have on this box, and at least 9.3 went back to OK.
>
> Hmm. I'd just finished pulling down FreeBSD-12.0-ALPHA9 and failing
> to repr
Larry Rosenman writes:
> On the original failure, I recompiled and reinstalled the 2 Python's I
> have on this box, and at least 9.3 went back to OK.
Hmm. I'd just finished pulling down FreeBSD-12.0-ALPHA9 and failing
to reproduce any problem with that ... and then I noticed your box
said it wa
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:08:33AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:43 AM Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:00 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > > I would argue that both dsm_postmaster_shutdown and dsm_postmaster_startup
> > > are broken here; the former because it m
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:43 AM Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:00 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > I would argue that both dsm_postmaster_shutdown and dsm_postmaster_startup
> > are broken here; the former because it makes no attempt to unmap
> > the old control segment (which it oughta be
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:00 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> 2018-10-17 13:43:24.235 CDT [46467:6] LOG: dynamic shared memory control
> segment is corrupt
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(dsm_control_mapped_size == 0)", File: "dsm.c", Line:
> 181)
>
> It looks to me like what's happening is
>
> (1) crashing pro
Larry Rosenman writes:
> That got it further, but still fails at PLCheck-C (at least on 9.3).
> It's still running the other branches.
Hmm. I'm not sure why plpython is crashing for you, but this is exposing
a robustness problem in the DSM logic:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_lo
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 01:41:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Larry Rosenman writes:
> > It looks like my upgrade to the current head of FreeBSD 12-to-be, which
> > includes OpenSSL 1.1.1 broke a bunch of our stuff.
> > In at least the 9.x branches. Just a heads up.
>
> It looks like configure is
Larry Rosenman writes:
> It looks like my upgrade to the current head of FreeBSD 12-to-be, which
> includes OpenSSL 1.1.1 broke a bunch of our stuff.
> In at least the 9.x branches. Just a heads up.
It looks like configure is drawing the wrong conclusions about OpenSSL's
API options. Since the
It looks like my upgrade to the current head of FreeBSD 12-to-be, which
includes OpenSSL 1.1.1 broke a bunch of our stuff.
In at least the 9.x branches. Just a heads up.
--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 214-642-9640 E-Mail: l...
23 matches
Mail list logo
