Closed
Bug 1214595
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
IndexedDB actorsParent crash on Z3c after x-heavy reference workload
Categories
(Core :: Storage: IndexedDB, defect)
Core
Storage: IndexedDB
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WORKSFORME
| blocking-b2g | 2.5+ |
People
(Reporter: gerard-majax, Assigned: janv)
References
Details
Attachments
(2 files)
STR:
0. Build & flash Z3c L opt
1. make reference-workload-x-heavy
Expected:
Boots properly
Actual:
Segfault
|
Reporter | |
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
As far as I can say, it is 100% repro when starting from a clean state.
|
||
Updated•10 years ago
|
blocking-b2g: --- → 2.5+
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
We might be exactly hitting what Kyle said on bug 1203803 comment 123
I don't think this is related to bug 1203803.
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Ken Chang[:ken] from comment #5)
> It is for L. Should it be a blocker?
I had the issue on L because I was working on something else, but I doubt it's because of L specifically ...
|
|
||
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
I reproduced on kk as well.
|
|
||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Summary: IndexedDB actorsParent crash on Z3c L after x-heavy reference workload → IndexedDB actorsParent crash on Z3c after x-heavy reference workload
The error code nsresult here is NS_ERROR_DOM_INDEXEDDB_ABORT_ERR.
|
||
Comment 9•10 years ago
|
||
Jan, can you look into this? If the workload reflects real life usage, it seems like we should block B2G 2.5 on it. Jan, that means we have ~1.5 weeks :/
Assignee: nobody → Jan.Varga
blocking-b2g: 2.5? → 2.5+
Flags: needinfo?(Jan.Varga)
|
|
||
Comment 10•10 years ago
|
||
Jan is now set up with a b2g environment and is working on this.
Flags: needinfo?(Jan.Varga)
|
||
Comment 11•10 years ago
|
||
Jan, Can you please post any progress on this bug? Thanks
Flags: needinfo?(Jan.Varga)
|
Assignee | |
Comment 12•10 years ago
|
||
I can't reproduce it anymore. Bug 961049 or something else might have fixed it.
Can someone verify it ? Thanks.
Flags: needinfo?(Jan.Varga)
|
|
||
Comment 13•10 years ago
|
||
Adding NI to Alexendre/Gregor to try reproducing it.
Flags: needinfo?(lissyx+mozillians)
Flags: needinfo?(anygregor)
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 14•10 years ago
|
||
Looks like I don't reproduce anymore.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Flags: needinfo?(lissyx+mozillians)
Flags: needinfo?(anygregor)
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
|
|
Assignee | |
Comment 15•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Alexandre LISSY :gerard-majax from comment #14)
> Looks like I don't reproduce anymore.
Wow, thanks for verifying!
|
|
||
Comment 16•10 years ago
|
||
If bug 961049 fixed this (a 2.5+ bug), do we need to uplift bug 961049 to 2.5? It's a big change ...
Flags: needinfo?(mpotharaju)
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 17•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Andrew Overholt [:overholt] from comment #16)
> If bug 961049 fixed this (a 2.5+ bug), do we need to uplift bug 961049 to
> 2.5? It's a big change ...
So I took gecko at the commit just before bug 961049 landed, and I don't repro the issue either.
|
|
Assignee | |
Comment 18•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Alexandre LISSY :gerard-majax from comment #17)
> (In reply to Andrew Overholt [:overholt] from comment #16)
> > If bug 961049 fixed this (a 2.5+ bug), do we need to uplift bug 961049 to
> > 2.5? It's a big change ...
>
> So I took gecko at the commit just before bug 961049 landed, and I don't
> repro the issue either.
Ok, so something else must have changed. Hm...
|
|
||
Comment 19•10 years ago
|
||
Based on comment 17, we will not uplift bug 961049 to 2.5
Flags: needinfo?(mpotharaju)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•