Thanks for this. I can't take the machines out of service at present,
but when I can, I'll look into shutting down services and seeing what
happens.
Andrew
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Maclean writes:
>> Messages in the log are consistently of the form:
>> 2009-0
Andrew Maclean writes:
> Messages in the log are consistently of the form:
> 2009-06-23 08:28:26 EST WARNING: worker took too long to start; cancelled
> FATAL: could not reattach to shared memory (key=252, addr=023F): 487
> 2009-06-23 08:35:58 EST WARNING: worker took too long to start; can
On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 09:28 +1000, Andrew Maclean wrote:
> [snipity snip snip]
>
> Notwithstanding all the previous discussion. I still think there is a
> problem with postgresql on windows.
I agree, but you don't seem to be prepared take any steps to diagnose
what Pg might be interacting with to
[snipity snip snip]
Notwithstanding all the previous discussion. I still think there is a
problem with postgresql on windows.
Messages in the log are consistently of the form:
2009-06-23 08:28:26 EST WARNING: worker took too long to start; cancelled
FATAL: could not reattach to shared memory (k
> >
> I'm hesitant to agree with this the PG installer doing more
> automatically. If the user does not understand security and proper
> configuration to get it to work on windows client, the server setup
> will be poorly configured with security problems that a MAC truck can
> drive through.
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 10:49 -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Andrew
> Maclean wrote:
> > One is running McAfee and the other is running Symantec Endpoint. It
> > does not matter whether the firewalls are on or off.
>
> Note that many packages for windows that do netwo
Pavel Stehule wrote:
2009/6/19 Leif B. Kristensen :
nobody needs Windows. But Postgres has only one reputation. Problems
on windows are PostgreSQL's problem too.
And there are some native windows firms that starts develop with
Postgres. And this people expecting stability. So if we su
Craig Ringer wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 01:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I see lots of questions here that seem to be related to (a) virus
scanner interference and (b) installation/reinstallation. Lots of the
reinstall issues seem to be with people who don't really understand NT
users, AC
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Andrew
Maclean wrote:
> One is running McAfee and the other is running Symantec Endpoint. It
> does not matter whether the firewalls are on or off.
Note that many packages for windows that do networking and virus
scanning installed "wedge" dlls that are always part
2009/6/19 Leif B. Kristensen :
> On Friday 19. June 2009, Andrew Maclean wrote:
>>I would NEVER run a production server in windows!
>>
>>These are just laptops/workstations that are used for development e.g,
>> when network connections are not available or when travelling.
>
> Both my workstation a
On Friday 19. June 2009, Andrew Maclean wrote:
>I would NEVER run a production server in windows!
>
>These are just laptops/workstations that are used for development e.g,
> when network connections are not available or when travelling.
Both my workstation and laptop have run Linux since 2003, and
goes away.
Andrew
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: Friday, 19 June 2009 15:03
To: Craig Ringer
Cc: a.macl...@cas.edu.au; General
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] postgresql-8.3.7 unexpected connection closures
Craig Ringer writes:
> I increasingly wonder if
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 01:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Craig Ringer writes:
> > I increasingly wonder if Symantec or McAfee can be persuaded to offer a
> > buildfarm machine with their software to PostgreSQL. Virus scanners on
> > servers are an (IMO nearly insane) fact of life on Windows, apparentl
Craig Ringer writes:
> I increasingly wonder if Symantec or McAfee can be persuaded to offer a
> buildfarm machine with their software to PostgreSQL. Virus scanners on
> servers are an (IMO nearly insane) fact of life on Windows, apparently,
> and certainly on Windows desktops that may also run Po
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 11:30 +1000, Andrew Maclean wrote:
> One is running McAfee and the other is running Symantec Endpoint. It
> does not matter whether the firewalls are on or off.
I increasingly wonder if Symantec or McAfee can be persuaded to offer a
buildfarm machine with their software to Po
One is running McAfee and the other is running Symantec Endpoint. It
does not matter whether the firewalls are on or off.
One thing I have noticed it that if I stop and restart the service
everything seems to work Ok.
Andrew
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Craig
Ringer wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-0
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 10:50 +1000, Andrew Maclean wrote:
> 2009-06-19 07:54:51 EST LOG: could not receive data from client:
> Unknown winsock error 10061
Winsock error 10061 is WSAECONNREFUSED (10061) Connection Refused. I
presume that means the client has sent an RST packet, but ... wtf? Why?
Thanks for the quick response, the log shows the following:
2009-06-19 07:51:47 EST LOG: database system was interrupted; last
known up at 2009-06-18 19:14:37 EST
2009-06-19 07:51:47 EST LOG: database system was not properly shut
down; automatic recovery in progress
2009-06-19 07:51:47 EST LOG:
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 09:12 +1000, Andrew Maclean wrote:
> I posted this a while back but got no useful responses.
>
> I have the following error message:
>
> "Error connecting to the server: server closed the connection unexpectedly.
> This probably means that the server terminated abnormally b
I posted this a while back but got no useful responses.
I have the following error message:
"Error connecting to the server: server closed the connection unexpectedly.
This probably means that the server terminated abnormally before or
while processing the request."
It happens intermittently bo
20 matches
Mail list logo
