while reading your thread two things come to mind, I have installed:
Registry Mechanic ( http://www.pctools.com/registry-mechanic )
Tune-Up Utilities ( http://www.tune-up.com/products/tuneup-utilities )
Any of these two might cause the problem aswell in your opinion?
With kind regards, Frank.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:38 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I don't really know anything about PostgreSQL on Windows, so I'm
> > afraid I can't give you too much help. My gut feeling from years of
> > experience with debugging random weird problems on various platforms
> > is that we need to know more about why this is happening to you and
> > not to other people.
> It is happening to *some* other people, as shown by previous bug
> reports, but what we lack is a way to reproduce it or identify just
> what's causing it.
> The error number 487 (which I think Frank is the first reporter to
> positively confirm) confirms our previous theory that the problem is
> inability to map the shared memory segment due to something else having
> already occupied the needed address range in the new child process.
> However, since the child process is running the same postmaster
> executable that was able to map the shared memory segment at that
> address to begin with, it's far from clear why that failure should
> occur. And experience shows that most of the time, for most people,
> it doesn't occur.
> My guess is that the cause is some sort of add-on software that
> invasively attaches itself to new processes. That could well be
> an antivirus, or a virus, or something else entirely (network
> stack addon?). Your suggestions about methodically trying to
> identify the cause are good.
> regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-02-25 04:51:04|
|Subject: Re: Service not starting: Error 1053 |
|Previous:||From: Frank Featherlight||Date: 2009-02-25 04:41:17|
|Subject: Re: Service not starting: Error 1053|