Re: Regression test failure date. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Regression test failure date.
Date
Msg-id 200307281605.h6SG5hU27860@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Regression test failure date.  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Regression test failure date.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I am now seeing this error in 2003-03-03.
 CREATE TABLE INSERT_CHILD (cx INT default 42,       cy INT CHECK (cy > x))       INHERITS (INSERT_TBL);
+ ERROR:  RelationClearRelation: relation 130996 deleted while still in use 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> I am testing this today.  I found 2003-03-03 to not generate a failure
> in 20 tests, so I am moving forward to April/May.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Robert Creager wrote:
> -- Start of PGP signed section.
> > 
> > I will stand by the fact that I cannot generate failures from
> > 2003-02-15 (200+ runs), and I can from 2003-02-16.  Just to make sure I
> > didn't screw up the cvs usage, I'll try again tonight if I get the
> > chance and re-download re-test these two days.
> > 
> > I can set up a script that will step through weekly dates starting from
> > 'now' and see if the 02-16 problem might of been fixed and then
> > re-introduced if you like.
> > 
> > 2003-02-16 fails 6/50
> >    vacuum failed 1 times
> >    misc failed 3 times
> >    sanity_check failed 3 times
> >    inherit failed 1 times
> >    triggers failed 4 times
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Rob
> > 
> > On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 02:14:32 -0400
> > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> said something like:
> > 
> > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > > > I have only been running nightly paralell regression runs since June
> > > > 27, so it is possible that the paralell regression was broken in
> > > > February, fixed in May, then broken some time after that.
> > > 
> > > Any further progress on this?
> > > 
> > > My best theory at the moment is that we have a problem with relcache
> > > entry creation failing if it's interrupted by an SI inval message at
> > > just the right time.  I don't much want to grovel through six months
> > > worth of changelog entries looking for candidate mistakes, though.
> > > 
> > >             regards, tom lane
> > > 
> > > ---------------------------(end of
> > > broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading
> > > through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> > >       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that
> > >       your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> >  06:57:40 up 10 days, 10:57,  2 users,  load average: 2.17, 2.08, 1.83
> -- End of PGP section, PGP failed!
> 
> -- 
>   Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
>   pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
>   +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
>   +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
>     (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
> 

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jenny -"
Date:
Subject: granularity of locks in postgresql
Next
From: ohp@pyrenet.fr
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature request -- Log Database Name