Tom Lane wrote:
>Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>>Well, it seems at least to be running. When I fire up postmaster there
>>are 4 processes running and no indication of failure that I could see on
>>the log. (There is a complaint about failing to dup(0) after 3195
>>successes - I assume that has nothing to do with it?)
>No, that's some code that's trying to measure the number of files we are
>allowed to open. It expects to fail, it just thought the particular
>errno it got was odd enough to report. Might be worth an #ifdef to tell
>it that that errno is expected on Cygwin?
Yes, looks like the error is EBADF.
>As far as the test failure, maybe we are just not allowing enough time
>for the stats collector to run? The thing sits there for 2 sec, which
>theoretically is plenty, but it's a busy-wait loop and if the Cygwin
>scheduler is not aggressive about taking away timeslices then maybe
>the stats processes don't get to run. Try doing the test script by
>hand, with just a manual delay instead of the sleep function, and see
>if it passes.
Yes, when I do that it works. But even when I increase the interval to
30 secs the regression script fails. I tried to use a sleep function
that didn't do a busy-wait loop, but plperl seems to segfault on this
platform :-( What fun.
What has changed in the last 3 weeks is that I refreshed my Cygwin
installation, I think when I was wrestling with the NLS thing. If
nothing in postgres has changed in this area I assume that platform
changes account for the regression.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Oleg Bartunov||Date: 2005-03-27 21:33:58|
|Subject: postgreSQL and history of relational databases|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-03-27 21:01:27|
|Subject: Re: _RollbackFunc : dead code? |