Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298

2007-04-20 Thread Tom Lane
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

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298

2007-04-20 Thread Tom Lane
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

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298

2007-04-20 Thread Magnus Hagander
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

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298

2007-04-20 Thread Magnus Hagander
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