The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 3246
Logged by: Andreas
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.2
Operating system: Windows Vista
Description:User "name" could not be created.
Details:
Hi
I can not install postgreSQL 8.2 or 8
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 3247
Logged by: Rajeev
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.2.3
Operating system: GNU/Linux
Description:Porblem during Import
Details:
During conversion from oracle to postgresql by ora2pg
1.
Magnus Hagander wrote:
The effective max count on Unixen is typically in the thousands,
and I'd suggest the same on Windows unless there's some efficiency
reason to keep it small (in which case, maybe ten would do).
AFAIK there's no problem with huge numbers (it takes an int32, and the
do
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> How is it possible for a semaphore to be unlocked "too many times"?
>>> It's supposed to be a running counter of the net V's minus P's, and
>>> yes it had better be able to count higher than one. Have we chosen
>>
Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> How is it possible for a semaphore to be unlocked "too many times"?
>> It's supposed to be a running counter of the net V's minus P's, and
>> yes it had better be able to count higher than one. Have we chosen
>> the wrong Windows pri
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 09:20:05AM +0200, Marcin Waldowski wrote:
I've looked at the code there, and can't find a clear problem. One way it
could happen is if the actual PGSemaphoreUnlock() is called once more than
need
"Dorochevsky,Michel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Two runs of the same test program fail at different places, so it seems to
> be dependent of the timing. Two log files are available at
>www.dorochevsky.de/infos/postgresql-2007-04-20_145638.zip
>www.dorochevsky.de/infos/postgresql-2007-04-
Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 09:20:05AM +0200, Marcin Waldowski wrote:
>>> I've looked at the code there, and can't find a clear problem. One way it
>>> could happen is if the actual PGSemaphoreUnlock() is called once more than
>>> needed.
> CC:ing to hack
Marcin Waldowski wrote:
Doesn't the postmaster restart all other backends due to the FATAL
error?
Are you saying that you can no longer make new connections to the
server,
or is the problem coming from that the aplpication doesn't like that the
server kicked out all connections?
No, we a
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Hmm, PGSemaphoreUnlock() actually ignore this error, only log that it
happens.
No. It does ereport(FATAL) which terminates the backend.
Oh, now I see, sorry :) Indeed on this one connection we receive
exception "FATAL: could not unlock semaphore", after that r
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:09:39AM +0200, Marcin Waldowski wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >I've looked at the code there, and can't find a clear problem. One way it
> >could happen is if the actual PGSemaphoreUnlock() is called once more than
> >needed.
> >
> >CC:ing to hackers for this questio
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I've looked at the code there, and can't find a clear problem. One way it
could happen is if the actual PGSemaphoreUnlock() is called once more than
needed.
CC:ing to hackers for this question:
Any chance that's happening? If this happens with SysV semaphores, will
they
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 09:20:05AM +0200, Marcin Waldowski wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I've made some analysis of PostgreSQL code. It looks like void
> PGSemaphoreUnlock(PGSemaphore sema) from backend\port\win32_sema.c was
> executed one time more than needed.
Certainly looks that way.
I've looked at
Hello.
I've made some analysis of PostgreSQL code. It looks like void
PGSemaphoreUnlock(PGSemaphore sema) from backend\port\win32_sema.c was
executed one time more than needed.
Error code 298 means "Too many posts were made to a semaphore":
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms681382.as
14 matches
Mail list logo
