Re: failures on barnacle (CLOBBER_CACHE_RECURSIVELY) because of memory leaks

"Tomas Vondra" <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> writes:
> So after 83 days, the regression tests on barnacle completed, and it
> smells like another memory leak in CacheMemoryContext, similar to those
> fixed in 078b2ed on May 18.

I've pushed fixes for the issues I was able to identify by running the
create_view test. I definitely don't have the patience to run all the
tests this way, but if you do, please start a new run.

A couple thoughts about barnacle's configuration:

* It's not necessary to set -DCLOBBER_FREED_MEMORY or -DMEMORY_CONTEXT_CHECKING
in CPPFLAGS; those are already selected by --enable-cassert. Removing
those -D switches would suppress a whole boatload of compiler warnings.

* I'm a bit dubious about testing -DRANDOMIZE_ALLOCATED_MEMORY in the
same build as -DCLOBBER_CACHE_RECURSIVELY, because each of these is
darned expensive and it's not clear you'd learn anything by running
them both together. I think you might be better advised to run two
separate buildfarm critters with those two options, and thereby perhaps
get turnaround in something less than 80 days.

* It'd likely be a good idea to take out the TestUpgrade and TestDecoding
modules from the config too. Otherwise, we won't be seeing barnacle's
next report before 2015, judging from the runtime of the check step
compared to some of the other slow buildfarm machines. (I wonder whether
there's an easy way to skip the installcheck step, as that's going to
require a much longer run than it can possibly be worth too.)

regards, tom lane