Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rather than post it in the e-mail, I've put the postmaster.log at
http://www.openvistas.net/postmaster.log
I see multiple occurrences of
LOG: could not fork new process for connection: Resource temporarily
unavailable
so indeed your p
Jeff Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rather than post it in the e-mail, I've put the postmaster.log at
> http://www.openvistas.net/postmaster.log
I see multiple occurrences of
LOG: could not fork new process for connection: Resource temporarily
unavailable
so indeed your process limit
Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:03:08PM -0700, Jeff Ross wrote:
If I put the same source code up on a ram disk, configure and compile it
the same way, all 96 tests pass.
Interesting. Is this behavior consistent? What's different 'twixt
the RAI
Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:03:08PM -0700, Jeff Ross wrote:
>> If I put the same source code up on a ram disk, configure and compile it
>> the same way, all 96 tests pass.
> Interesting. Is this behavior consistent? What's different 'twixt
> the RAID di
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:03:08PM -0700, Jeff Ross wrote:
> If I put the source for 8.0.0 on disk (RAID 1) , configure, compile and
> run gmake check, it fails with 33 errors, 30 of which are
>
> ! psql: could not send startup packet: Broken pipe
Somebody else using OpenBSD reported a similar
Hi,
If I put the source for 8.0.0 on disk (RAID 1) , configure, compile and
run gmake check, it fails with 33 errors, 30 of which are
! psql: could not send startup packet: Broken pipe
If I put the same source code up on a ram disk, configure and compile it
the same way, all 96 tests pass.
OS i
