On 2014-05-05 15:41:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
After far, far too much confused head scratching, code reading, random
elog()s et al I found out that this is just because of a deficiency in
valgrind's undefinedness tracking. [...]
Unfortunately this cannot precisely be caught by valgrind's
On 2014-05-05 18:50:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-05-05 15:41:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Looks all right to me. Yeah, the right shift might have undefined
high-order bits, but we don't care because we're storing the result
into an int16.
Hi,
While investigating an issue pointed out by valgrind around undefined
bytes in inval.c SHAREDINVALSMGR_ID processing I noticed that there's a
bug in ReceiveSharedInvalidMessages(). It tries to be safe against
recursion but it's not:
When it recurses into ReceiveSharedInvalidMessages() from
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
While investigating an issue pointed out by valgrind around undefined
bytes in inval.c SHAREDINVALSMGR_ID processing I noticed that there's a
bug in ReceiveSharedInvalidMessages(). It tries to be safe against
recursion but it's not:
When it
On 2014-05-05 14:15:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
While investigating an issue pointed out by valgrind around undefined
bytes in inval.c SHAREDINVALSMGR_ID processing I noticed that there's a
bug in ReceiveSharedInvalidMessages(). It tries to be safe
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
a) SICleanupQueue() sometimes releases and reacquires the write lock
held on the outside. That's pretty damn fragile, not to mention
ugly. Even slight reformulations of the code in SIInsertDataEntries()
can break this... Can we please
On 2014-05-05 15:41:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
a) SICleanupQueue() sometimes releases and reacquires the write lock
held on the outside. That's pretty damn fragile, not to mention
ugly. Even slight reformulations of the code in
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-05-05 15:41:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Looks all right to me. Yeah, the right shift might have undefined
high-order bits, but we don't care because we're storing the result
into an int16.
Doesn't at the very least
