Re: Intermittent pg_ctl failures on Windows - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Intermittent pg_ctl failures on Windows
Date
Msg-id 1580.1563512383@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Intermittent pg_ctl failures on Windows  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Intermittent pg_ctl failures on Windows  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Re: Intermittent pg_ctl failures on Windows  (r.zharkov@postgrespro.ru)
Re: Intermittent pg_ctl failures on Windows  (r.zharkov@postgrespro.ru)
List pgsql-hackers
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 04:14:34PM +0700, Жарков Роман wrote:
>> I have tested clean REL_11_STABLE.
>> Commit f02259fe was reverted by df8b5f3e in this branch.
>> So pg_ctl uses “old” open() function.

> Yeah, that was a failure from me, so I tend to be rather very careful
> about anything related to Windows.  However, after that we have added 
> 40cfe86 about which nobody has complained yet, and the number of
> buildfarm failures about pg_ctl concurrency on HEAD has gone down to
> zero since (perhaps I am missing something?).

Hm, I think 0ba06e0 is actually the relevant change here?  Though
40cfe86 was a necessary cleanup fix.

I'm too tired to dig in the buildfarm database to be sure, but my
impression is that the failure rate is much-better-but-not-zero.
So I'd support back-patching those two commits, but I'm not sure
if that's the end of the conversation.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: refactoring - share str2*int64 functions
Next
From: Жарков Роман
Date:
Subject: Re: Intermittent pg_ctl failures on Windows