Re: initdb issue on 64-bit Windows - (Was: [pgsql-packagers] PG 9.6beta2 tarballs are ready) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Craig Ringer
Subject Re: initdb issue on 64-bit Windows - (Was: [pgsql-packagers] PG 9.6beta2 tarballs are ready)
Date
Msg-id CAMsr+YGJVks0s049Nf009t2MZ06mjWLw=AhRfn9JSikdKHqT_w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: initdb issue on 64-bit Windows - (Was: [pgsql-packagers] PG 9.6beta2 tarballs are ready)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: initdb issue on 64-bit Windows - (Was: [pgsql-packagers] PG 9.6beta2 tarballs are ready)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers


On 24 June 2016 at 21:34, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
 

TBH, this looks more like a compiler bug than anything else. 

I tend to agree. Especially since valgrind has no complaints on x64 linux, and neither does DrMemory for 32-bit builds with the same toolchain on the same Windows and same SDK.

I don't see any particular reason we can't proceed with 9.6beta2 and build x64 Pg with MS VS 2015. There's no evidence turning up of a Pg bug here, and compiling with a different toolchain gets us working binaries for the target platform in question.
 
It would be worth recompiling at -O0, or whatever the local equivalent
of that is, to see if (1) the crash goes away or (2) the debugger's
printouts get any more reliable

Yeah, it probably is. I'll see if I can find time this w/e.


--
 Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrey Zhidenkov
Date:
Subject: Re: Memory leak in Pl/Python
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Hash Indexes