-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11k
Mark error code details as global #12237
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). 📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign. Once you've signed, please reply here (e.g.
|
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
4 similar comments
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
I signed it! |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
11 similar comments
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
Thanks for your pull request. The automated tests will run as soon as one of the admins verifies this change is ok for us to run on our infrastructure. |
|
jenkins: this is ok to test |
|
@apolcyn I can't check the failures :-( Also, I've already signed the CLA, but it's still tagged incorrectly. |
|
CLAs look good, thanks! |
|
test failures look like unrelated flakes. But wondering what ruby version did you see this on? Were you able to manually trigger GC during that require statement? It's a small change and it looks right to me, but it would be nice to be able to verify. |
|
@apolcyn Thank you for checking on the failures. We saw it on 2.3.3. I really wish there was a test I could add, but it happens super infrequently, and we'd basically need a hook between the moment the hash gets initialized and when the values get set. In other words, I don't know how to get this done and verify it without a hook in the C extension that would only be there for the sake of testing. |
|
lgtm, but tests have gone stale, so waiting for a re-run |
|
Looks much better. Want me to rebase |
|
rebase isn't needed since there's no conflicts |
|
👍 |
|
infrastructure failure on mac tests |
In the Ruby implementation, the code initializes a hash and then initializes a bunch of strings before assigning the hash to a constant.
In some cases, the string allocations trigger a GC event, which will clear the hash because nothing references it.
Further down the line, the hash is frozen, but it makes Ruby processes segfault when it's been collected by GC.
This PR marks it as global to hint the GC to leave it alone.
Thank you @fbogsany for pointing me in the right direction.