Re: What is happening on buildfarm member dugong

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Sergey E(dot) Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: What is happening on buildfarm member dugong
Date: 2007-09-14 03:51:28
Message-ID: 19521.1189741888@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Sergey E. Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> writes:
> It turned out that the offending assert is
> Assert(BgWriterShmem != NULL); in bgwriter.c:990
> After commenting it out everything works.

That's simply bizarre ...

> Also, I tried to add 'volatile' to the declaration of BgWriterShmem. After
> that the problem disappears too.

Hm. I don't see any very good reason in the code to add the "volatile",
and I see at least one place where we'd have to cast it away (the MemSet
at line 836). My inclination is just to remove the Assert at line 990.
It's not proving anything, since if indeed BgWriterShmem was NULL there,
we'd dump core on the dereferences just a couple lines below.

Do you want this patched any further back than HEAD? The buildfarm
status page doesn't show dugong doing any back branches ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-09-14 03:52:19 Re: Reducing Transaction Start/End Contention
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-09-14 03:44:11 Re: [mmoncure@gmail.com: Re: [GENERAL] array_to_set functions]