Re: master check fails on Windows Server 2008

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: Raw Message | Whole Thread | 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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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