On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 12:26:34PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 11:48:31AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > I can't duplicate the ps problem and I don't use psql.exe so, unless someone
> > can debug this, or provide more details, this will be a problem that is in
> > 1.1.5.
> Either of the two attached patches will solve the 1.1.5 psql.exe problem.
> I think that the first one is more correct and the second one safer (i.e.,
> less likely to break other code).
After more research, I realize that both of the above patches are wrong.
Sorry for the gyrations but I went into frenzy mode due to the impending
1.1.5 release (which if I remember correctly was suppose to be
yesterday)... I was also thrown off by Cygwin's strerror(EAGAIN)
returning "No more processes" instead of "Resource temporarily
unavailable" as on other UNIXes (at least Solaris and RedHat 6.2 Linux).
Anyway, I now think that PostgreSQL's psql should be changed to deal
with the possibility of errno equal to EAGAIN when connect() returns -1.
See attached patch for details.
Does anyone else concur?
P.S. From reading the MSDN, it appears that Win32 psql should be checking
for WSAEWOULDBLOCK too...
Director, Software Engineering Phone: +1 (732) 264-8770 x235
Dot Hill Systems Corporation Fax: +1 (732) 264-8798
82 Bethany Road, Suite 7 Email: Jason(dot)Tishler(at)dothill(dot)com
Hazlet, NJ 07730 USA WWW: http://www.dothill.com
In response to
pgsql-ports by date
|Next:||From: lbottorff||Date: 2000-11-03 22:26:11|
|Subject: Errors building Postgres on NT|
|Previous:||From: Bob Love||Date: 2000-11-03 00:04:37|
|Subject: RE: Compiling postgresql on WinNT|