Re: Make check problem with 7.2

From: Steven N=?ISO-8859-1?B?+vE=?=ez <nunez(at)itl-global(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Make check problem with 7.2
Date: 2002-03-04 03:35:01
Message-ID: B8A90C65.2261%nunez@itl-global.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Is there any way to work around this problem? We no longer have support for
this machine, so will probably not be able to recompile the kernel. Strange
too, that it didn't happen on earlier versions.

Regards,
- Steve Nunez

On 4/3/02 10:15, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Steven N=?ISO-8859-1?B?+vE=?=ez <nunez(at)itl-global(dot)com> writes:
>> This time I've included the log file...
>
>> DEBUG: connection startup failed (fork failure): Resource temporarily
>> unavailable
>> DEBUG: connection startup failed (fork failure): Resource temporarily
>> unavailable
>> DEBUG: connection startup failed (fork failure): Resource temporarily
>> unavailable
>> DEBUG: connection startup failed (fork failure): Resource temporarily
>> unavailable
>> DEBUG: connection startup failed (fork failure): Resource temporarily
>> unavailable
>> DEBUG: connection startup failed (fork failure): Resource temporarily
>> unavailable
>
> At a guess, you have the max-processes-per-user limit set too low.
>
> The postmaster attempts to report the fork failure to the client,
> but it looks like (at least on your platform) libpq gives up before
> receiving the error message. I wonder if it'd make sense for libpq
> to ignore send failure on the startup packet, so it could move ahead
> to receive the error message. I have a feeling that would make the
> behavior worse in other scenarios, though, so it may not be a win.
>
> regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-03-04 05:03:53 Re: Make check problem with 7.2
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-03-04 02:15:20 Re: Make check problem with 7.2