Hi,
On 2018-12-17 15:35:01 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-12-16 13:48:00 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2018-12-17 08:25:38 +1100, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:57 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > The interesting bit is that if I replace the _exit(2) in
> > > > bgw
Hi,
On 2018-12-16 13:48:00 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-12-17 08:25:38 +1100, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:57 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > The interesting bit is that if I replace the _exit(2) in
> > > bgworker_quickdie() with an exit(2) (i.e. processing at
Hi,
On 2018-12-17 08:25:38 +1100, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:57 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > The interesting bit is that if I replace the _exit(2) in
> > bgworker_quickdie() with an exit(2) (i.e. processing atexit handlers),
> > or manully add an OPENSSL_cleanup() before the _
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:57 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> The interesting bit is that if I replace the _exit(2) in
> bgworker_quickdie() with an exit(2) (i.e. processing atexit handlers),
> or manully add an OPENSSL_cleanup() before the _exit(2), valgrind
> doesn't find errors.
Weird. Well I can se
Hi,
On 2018-12-16 22:33:00 +1100, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 4:14 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > On December 13, 2018 6:01:04 PM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Has anyone tried to reproduce this on other platforms?
> >
> > > I recently also hit this locally,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 4:14 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On December 13, 2018 6:01:04 PM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Has anyone tried to reproduce this on other platforms?
>
> > I recently also hit this locally, but since that's also Debian unstable...
> > Note that removing op
Andres Freund writes:
> On December 13, 2018 6:01:04 PM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Has anyone tried to reproduce this on other platforms?
> I recently also hit this locally, but since that's also Debian unstable...
> Note that removing openssl "fixed" the issue for me.
FWIW, I tried to reproduce
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 1:15 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On December 13, 2018 6:01:04 PM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
> >Thomas Munro writes:
> >> Since libcrypto.so is implicated, Andres asked me off-list if my
> >> changes to random number state initialisation might be linked to
> >> skink's failures be
On December 13, 2018 6:01:04 PM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
>Thomas Munro writes:
>> Since libcrypto.so is implicated, Andres asked me off-list if my
>> changes to random number state initialisation might be linked to
>> skink's failures beginning 12 or 15 days ago. It appears not, as it
>> was gree
Thomas Munro writes:
> Since libcrypto.so is implicated, Andres asked me off-list if my
> changes to random number state initialisation might be linked to
> skink's failures beginning 12 or 15 days ago. It appears not, as it
> was green for several runs after that commit.
> ...
> It's Debian unst
Hello,
Since libcrypto.so is implicated, Andres asked me off-list if my
changes to random number state initialisation might be linked to
skink's failures beginning 12 or 15 days ago. It appears not, as it
was green for several runs after that commit. Looking at the report:
==2802== VALGRINDERRO
11 matches
Mail list logo
