On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 2:10 AM Christoph Berg wrote:
>
> Re: Amit Kapila 2020-01-09
>
> > The point is that we know what is going wrong on sidewinder on back
> > branches. However, we still don't know what is going wrong with tern
> > and mandrill on v10 [1][2] where the log is:
>
> Fwiw, the
Re: Amit Kapila 2020-01-09
> The point is that we know what is going wrong on sidewinder on back
> branches. However, we still don't know what is going wrong with tern
> and mandrill on v10 [1][2] where the log is:
Fwiw, the problem on bionic disappeared yesterday with the build
triggered by "R
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 5:48 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Andres Freund writes:
> > Is it worth having the test close superflous FDs? It'd not be hard to do
> > so via brute force (or even going through /proc/self/fd).
>
> No, it isn't, because d20703805's test is broken by design. There
> are any numb
Andres Freund writes:
> Is it worth having the test close superflous FDs? It'd not be hard to do
> so via brute force (or even going through /proc/self/fd).
No, it isn't, because d20703805's test is broken by design. There
are any number of reasons why there might be more than three-or-so
FDs op
Hi,
On 2020-01-08 17:31:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> (1) d20703805's test will clearly fall over if there are more than six
> FDs open in the postmaster when set_max_safe_fds is called, because it
> sets max_files_per_process = 26 while set_max_safe_fds requires at
> least 20 usable FDs to be avail
I wrote:
> This would happen if anything is causing the postmaster to have
> a few more open files than the test added by commit
> d207038053837ae9365df2776371632387f6f655 is allowing for. It's
> a test bug and nothing more.
> Why sidewinder is not showing this in HEAD too is an interesting
> ques
Christoph Berg writes:
> (Fwiw, I can't see your error message in
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=sidewinder&dt=2020-01-07%2022%3A45%3A24)
sidewinder is currently broken due to an unrelated problem.
The case Amit is worried about is only manifesting on the
back branches,
Re: Amit Kapila 2020-01-08
> It looks like this failure is more of what we are getting on
> "sidewinder" where it failed because of "insufficient file descriptors
> available to start server process". Can you check in the log
> (probably in 006_logical_decoding_master.log) if this is the same yo
