Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23)

On 2024-12-12 Th 9:31 PM, Robins Tharakan wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 at 12:46, Robins Tharakan <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> REL_17_STABLE failed on misc-recovery and one context I can add
> here is
> that I triggered both REL_16_STABLE and REL_17_STABLE together and
> were running neck-and-neck wherein v16 went past this test (in ~4
> minutes)
> and v17 (got stuck for ~10 min) and failed.
>
>
> Is it possible that 2 concurrent runs (of different branches) could
> step on each other?
>
> These are the logs that I captured, and v16 [2] / v17 [1] literally
> ran at the same
> time (seconds apart).
>
>
> v16 log:
> alligator:REL_16_STABLE [12:24:42] running bin test scripts ...
> alligator:REL_16_STABLE [12:25:28] running test misc-recovery ...
> alligator:REL_16_STABLE [12:29:40] running test misc-subscription ...
>
>
> v17 log:
> alligator:REL_17_STABLE [12:25:09] running bin test psql ...
> alligator:REL_17_STABLE [12:25:19] running bin test scripts ...
> alligator:REL_17_STABLE [12:26:00] running test misc-recovery ...
> alligator:REL_17_STABLE [12:37:15] failed at stage recoveryCheck
> $
>

We actually have a good deal of protection against concurrent runs
clobbering each other.

It's not clear to me if you're using "run_branches.pl --run-parallel" or
not. If not, you might like to consider changing to that - it's the
recommended way of doing concurrent runs. Apart from any other reason it
removes the need for a lot of redundant git fetches. By default it
staggers concurrent build starts by 60 seconds.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com