Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start
Date
Msg-id 20170424213807.kh5nfkfufqllp2wa@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2017-04-24 17:33:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > On 2017-04-24 13:16:44 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> Unclear if related, but
> >> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=gharial&dt=2017-04-24%2019%3A30%3A42
> >> has a suspicious timing of failing in a weird way.
> 
> > Given that gharial is also failing on 9.6 (same set of commits) and
> > coypu fails (again same set) on 9.6
> > https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=coypu&dt=2017-04-24%2018%3A20%3A33
> 
> coypu's problem is unrelated:
> 
> running bootstrap script ... 2017-04-24 23:04:53.084 CEST [21114] FATAL:  could not create semaphores: No space left
ondevice
 
> 2017-04-24 23:04:53.084 CEST [21114] DETAIL:  Failed system call was semget(1, 17, 03600).

Note I was linking the 9.6 report form coypu, not HEAD. Afaics the 9.6
failure is the same as gharial's mode of failure.

- Andres



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start
Next
From: Petr Jelinek
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] walsender & parallelism