Tom Lane wrote: > I've been digging into why buildfarm member thrush has been dumping core > consistently during the regression tests since the posix_fadvise patch > went in. I've confirmed that posix_fadvise() itself will SIGSEGV in a > standalone test program, and found that this happens only if > _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 ... which is our default configuration on Linux. > > Some googling turned up the following > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=313219 > which basically says that posix_fadvise64 + 2.4 kernel + older glibc > = crash. It sounds like the 2.4 kernel hasn't got this call but glibc > thought it did, up till about a year ago. > > While we could possibly come up with a suitable configure test to > determine whether posix_fadvise is actually safe to use on a given > system, I think we should seriously consider just reverting the patch. > As far as I saw, zero evidence was given that it actually does anything > measurable. Without a benchmark to prove that it's worth spending more > time on, I'm disinclined to trouble over it.
Agreed. How about if we just #ifdef NOT_USED the code and mention the problem in a comment. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
