Re: segfault in geqo on experimental gcc animal
Hello. The issue is resolved now and tests are fine for me. Martin On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 13:11, Martin Liška wrote: > > Heh, it's me who now breaks postgresql build: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92529 > > Martin > > On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 13:01, Fabien COELHO > wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, after the revision I see other failing tests like: > > > > Indeed, I can confirm there are still 18/195 fails with the updated gcc. > > > > > I'm going to investigate that and will inform you guys. > > > > Great, thanks! > > > > -- > > Fabien.
Re: segfault in geqo on experimental gcc animal
Heh, it's me who now breaks postgresql build: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92529 Martin On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 13:01, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > > > Yes, after the revision I see other failing tests like: > > Indeed, I can confirm there are still 18/195 fails with the updated gcc. > > > I'm going to investigate that and will inform you guys. > > Great, thanks! > > -- > Fabien.
Re: segfault in geqo on experimental gcc animal
Yes, after the revision I see other failing tests like: ... select_having... ok 16 ms subselect... FAILED 92 ms union... FAILED 77 ms case ... ok 32 ms join ... FAILED 239 ms aggregates ... FAILED 136 ms transactions ... ok 59 ms ... I'm going to investigate that and will inform you guys. Martin On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 11:56, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > > > Yep, I build periodically PostgreSQL package in openSUSE with the latest > > GCC and so that I identified that and isolated to a simple test-case. I > > would expect a fix today or tomorrow. > > Indeed, the gcc issue reported seems fixed by gcc r278259. I'm updating > moonjelly gcc to check if this solves pg compilation woes. > > -- > Fabien.
Re: segfault in geqo on experimental gcc animal
Hi. Yep, I build periodically PostgreSQL package in openSUSE with the latest GCC and so that I identified that and isolated to a simple test-case. I would expect a fix today or tomorrow. See you, Martin On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 at 16:46, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > > Hello, > > I did a (slow) dichotomy on gcc sources which determined that gcc r277979 > was the culprit, then I started a bug report which showed that the issue > was already reported this morning by Martin Liška, including a nice > example isolated from sources. See: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92506 > > -- > Fabien.
