Skip to content

Conversation

@chands10
Copy link
Contributor

To help us review your pull request, please consider providing an overview of the following:

  • What is the type of the change (bug fix, feature, documentation and etc.) ?
  • What are the current behavior and expected behavior, if this is a bugfix ?
  • What are the steps required to reproduce the bug, if this is a bugfix ?
  • What is the current behavior and new behavior, if this is a feature change or enhancement ?
  • [Optional] Why is the new behavior better than the current behavior, if this is a feature change ?

@chands10 chands10 changed the title {179857679}: Port sockpool may be poisoned by vforked processes Port localcache and protobuf changes Dec 16, 2025
@riverszhang89
Copy link
Contributor

protobuf memory pool changes are ported in #5621.

@chands10 chands10 force-pushed the vfork branch 2 times, most recently from 19393e8 to f8e766f Compare December 16, 2025 19:43
Signed-off-by: Salil Chandra <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Salil Chandra <[email protected]>
Copy link

@roborivers roborivers left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Coding style check: Success ✓.
Smoke testing: Success ✓.
Cbuild submission: Success ✓.
Regression testing: Success ✓.

The first 10 failing tests are:
truncatesc
consumer_non_atomic_default_consumer_generated
insert_lots_ssl_generated
insert_lots
reco-ddlk-sql

@chands10
Copy link
Contributor Author

cdb2test Dec 16 16:34:33 2025 success vfork.R20251216.2

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants