Re: Assert failure found in 8.1RC1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: Assert failure found in 8.1RC1
Date
Msg-id 20051104212522.GA9989@pervasive.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Assert failure found in 8.1RC1  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Assert failure found in 8.1RC1  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:45:21PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Creager <Robert.Creager@Sun.com> writes:
> > Ran with both for an hour with no problem, where I could produce the ASSERT
> > failure within minutes for the non patched version.
> 
> Great.  I'll go ahead and commit the smaller fix into HEAD and the back
> branches, and hold the larger fix for 8.2.
> 
> It's curious that two different people stumbled across this just
> recently, when the bug has been there since 7.2.  I suppose that the
> addition of pg_subtrans increased the probability of seeing the bug by
> a considerable amount, but I'm still surprised it wasn't identified
> before.  At the very least, we should have heard about it earlier in
> the 8.0 release cycle ...

Well, the common theme in each case IIRC is a fairly high transaction
rate; on the order of hundreds if not thousands per second.

Could something like that be added to regression, or maybe as a seperate
test case for the buildfarm?
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data