Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Tom Lane píše v čt 11. 03. 2010 v 11:37 -0500: > Zdenek Kotala writes: > > "-xO4 -xalias_level=basic" generates problem. > > "-xO3 -xalias_level=basic" works fine > > "-xO5" works fine > > > As documentation say: > > > Cite from Sun studio compiler guide: > > http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819

Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Dne 11.03.10 17:37, Tom Lane napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala writes: "-xO4 -xalias_level=basic" generates problem. "-xO3 -xalias_level=basic" works fine "-xO5" works fine As documentation say: Cite from Sun studio compiler guide: http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5265/bjapp?a=view xalias_l

Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Dne 11.03.10 16:24, Greg Stark napsal(a): On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote: My conclusion is that this is probably a compiler bug. Both buildfarm animals appear to be using Sun Studio, although on different architectures which weakens the compiler-bug theory a bit. Even though

Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Tom Lane
Zdenek Kotala writes: > "-xO4 -xalias_level=basic" generates problem. > "-xO3 -xalias_level=basic" works fine > "-xO5" works fine > As documentation say: > Cite from Sun studio compiler guide: > http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5265/bjapp?a=view > xalias_level=basic > -- > I

Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Hi Tom, I'm sorry that I did not look on it early. I played with it and there are some facts. gothic(sparc) and codlin(x86) uses Sun Studio 12 nad I setup them to use very high optimization. Gothic: --- -xalias_level=basic -xarch=native -xdepend -xmemalign=8s -xO5 -xprefetch=auto,explici

Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Stark writes: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> My conclusion is that this is probably a compiler bug. > Could be this: > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6750087 Hmmm ... that doesn't seem to be quite an exact match, because the setting and testing o

Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Stark writes: > Incidentally Zdenek came to the same conclusion that it was a compiler > bug in <4aa775a9.80...@sun.com> Drat, I had forgotten that exchange. I reconstructed Teodor's advice the hard way :-( regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Greg Stark
Incidentally Zdenek came to the same conclusion that it was a compiler bug in <4aa775a9.80...@sun.com> -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-11 Thread Greg Stark
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > My conclusion is that this is probably a compiler bug.  Both buildfarm > animals appear to be using Sun Studio, although on different > architectures which weakens the compiler-bug theory a bit.  Even though > we are not seeing the failure in lat

[HACKERS] gothic_moth, codlin_moth failures on REL8_2_STABLE

2010-03-10 Thread Tom Lane
Since the buildfarm is mostly green these days, I took some time to look into the few remaining consistent failures. One is that gothic_moth and codlin_moth fail on contrib/tsearch2 in the 8.2 branch, with a regression diff like this: *** 2453,2459 Sea view wow foo bar qq http://ww