Hi,
On 2022-04-08 17:55:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> After seeing skink's results, I tried running that test under valgrind
> here, and it fails just like that every time. skink's history allows
> us to bound the failure introduction between 79b716cfb7 and
> d7ab2a9a3c, which I think makes it just about certain that it was
> 5dc0418fab (Prefetch data referenced by the WAL, take II), though I've
> not bisected to be 100% sure.
I've tested it, it's 5dc0418fab that makes the difference. I reduced the cycle
time by making initdb not go through valgrind, but have normal postgres
instances go through it.
> On the whole, I'm not sure that the WAL prefetch logic is noticeably
> more stable than when we booted it out last year :-(.
IDK. Last year's issues seems to have largely been caused by a flaky
machine. And a bug, if it's that, in some archiving corner case that's not
normally reached during tests...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
