On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 12:55 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
> The cfbot seems to be showing "pg_regress: initdb failed" on Ubuntu,
> with an assertion failure like this:
>
> #2 0x00000000008e594f in ExceptionalCondition
> (conditionName=conditionName@entry=0x949098 "BTreeTupleGetNAtts(itup,
> rel) >= key->keysz", errorType=errorType@entry=0x938a7d
> "FailedAssertion", fileName=fileName@entry=0x949292 "nbtsearch.c",
This is a legitimate bug in v1 of the patch, which was written in a
hurry. v2 does not have the problem. Floris inadvertently created a
separate thread for this same patch, which I responded to when posting
v2. I've now updated the CF entry for this patch [1] to have both
threads.
BTW, I've noticed that CF Tester is wonky with patches that have
multiple threads with at least one patch file posted to each thread.
The deduplication patch [2] has this problem, for example. It would be
nice if CF Tester knew to prefer one thread over another based on a
simple rule, like "consistently look for patch files on the first
thread connected to a CF app entry, never any other thread".
Maybe you'd rather not go that way -- I guess that it would break
other cases, such as the CF app entry for this patch (which now
technically has one thread that supersedes the other). Perhaps a
compromise is possible. At a minimum, CF Tester should not look for a
patch on the (say) second thread of a CF app entry for a patch just
because somebody posted an e-mail to that thread (an e-mail that did
not contain a new patch). CF Tester will do this even though there is
a more recent patch on the first thread of the CF app entry, that has
already been accepted as passing by CFTester. I believe that CF Tester
will actually pingpong back and forth between the same two patches on
each thread as e-mail is sent to each thread, without anybody ever
posting a new patch.
Thanks
[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/27/2429/#
[2] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/27/2202/
--
Peter Geoghegan
