Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-30 Thread Rémi Zara
Le 29 déc. 04, à 23:38, Tom Lane a écrit : =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Zara?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Le 29 d=E9c. 04, =E0 18:05, Tom Lane a =E9crit : Backtracing the core dump from that crash would do fine. Here you go (gdb) bt #0 0x010a in ?? () #1 0x046e9cce in queryin (buf=3DCannot access

Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-30 Thread Tom Lane
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Zara?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmm. I was hoping to spot some obviously machine-dependent code nearby to the crash point, but I don't see anything wrong in that area. You might try rebuilding tsearch with -O0 (if it wasn't already) in hopes that the backtrace becomes

Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-30 Thread Rémi Zara
Le 30 déc. 04, à 16:05, Tom Lane a écrit : =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Zara?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmm. I was hoping to spot some obviously machine-dependent code nearby to the crash point, but I don't see anything wrong in that area. You might try rebuilding tsearch with -O0 (if it wasn't

Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-30 Thread Tom Lane
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Zara?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ugh. That suggests it could be a compiler bug. Are you using the latest available compiler version for your platform? The problem is that when compiled with -O2, the pushval_morph func address is 0x0 (in query.c). It goes away with the

Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-29 Thread Rémi Zara
Le 28 déc. 04, à 23:36, Tom Lane a écrit : Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This result is now seen for HEAD on buildfarm member osprey: Yeah, I was wondering about that. It should be easy to reproduce the failure by hand (just run the tsearch regression test and then re-execute that

Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-29 Thread Tom Lane
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Zara?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: here is the tail of regression.diff (which indicates that the first=20 query failed): SELECT '1'::mquery_txt; ! server closed the connection unexpectedly ! This probably means the server terminated abnormally ! before or

Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-29 Thread Rémi Zara
Le 29 déc. 04, à 18:05, Tom Lane a écrit : =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Zara?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: here is the tail of regression.diff (which indicates that the first=20 query failed): SELECT '1'::mquery_txt; ! server closed the connection unexpectedly ! This probably means the server

Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-29 Thread Tom Lane
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Zara?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Le 29 d=E9c. 04, =E0 18:05, Tom Lane a =E9crit : Backtracing the core dump from that crash would do fine. Here you go (gdb) bt #0 0x010a in ?? () #1 0x046e9cce in queryin (buf=3DCannot access memory at address 0x0 ) at

[HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-28 Thread Andrew Dunstan
This result is now seen for HEAD on buildfarm member osprey: = pgsql.23138/contrib/tsearch/regression.diffs === *** ./expected/tsearch.out Tue Dec 28 12:05:27 2004 --- ./results/tsearch.out Tue Dec 28 19:52:47 2004 *** *** 312,322 (1 row) SELECT

Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm NetBSD/m68k tsearch regression failure

2004-12-28 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This result is now seen for HEAD on buildfarm member osprey: Yeah, I was wondering about that. It should be easy to reproduce the failure by hand (just run the tsearch regression test and then re-execute that query) --- can we see a debugger stack trace