| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes |
| Date: | 2018-09-06 21:38:38 |
| Message-ID: | 21573.1536269918@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> So where are we on this? Should I proceed with my patch, or are we
> going to do further investigation? Does anyone want to do an actual
> patch review?
[ crickets... ]
So I took that as license to proceed, but while doing a final round of
testing I found out that a CLOBBER_CACHE_RECURSIVELY build fails,
because now that's an infinite recursion. On reflection it's a bit
surprising that it wasn't so all along. What I'm inclined to do about
it is to adjust AcceptInvalidationMessages so that there's a finite
recursion depth limit in the CLOBBER_CACHE_RECURSIVELY case, as there
already is in the CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS case. Maybe 3 or so levels
would be enough.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-09-06 21:50:24 | Re: buildfarm: could not read block 3 in file "base/16384/2662": read only 0 of 8192 bytes |
| Previous Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2018-09-06 21:25:01 | Re: Commit fest 2018-09 |