| From: | Marina Polyakova <m(dot)polyakova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: master check fails on Windows Server 2008 |
| Date: | 2018-02-21 10:20:18 |
| Message-ID: | 8f4ffc894bf080bca73a4f47eac29ac7@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 20-02-2018 21:23, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marina Polyakova <m(dot)polyakova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
>> On 20-02-2018 3:37, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> 4. Try to tweak the stats_ext.sql test conditions in some more
>>> refined
>>> way to get the test to pass everywhere. This'd be a lot of work with
>>> no guarantee of success, so I'm not too excited about it.
>
>> Thank you for your explanations! I'll try to do something in this
>> direction..
>
> OK. The least painful fix might be to establish a different work_mem
> setting just for that one query.
>
> However, if you're intent on putting work into continued support of
> --disable-float8-byval, I would *strongly* suggest setting up a
> buildfarm
> member that runs that way, because otherwise we're pretty much
> guaranteed
> to break it again.
Oh, thank you again!
> I continue to wonder if it's not better to just remove
> the option and thereby simplify our lives. What's the actual value of
> having it anymore?
I agree with you, but I have too little experience to vote for removing
this option.
--
Marina Polyakova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2018-02-21 10:42:03 | Re: NEXT VALUE FOR sequence |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2018-02-21 10:15:17 | Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning |