| From: | Marcin Waldowski <M(dot)Waldowski(at)sulechow(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298 |
| Date: | 2007-04-20 08:09:39 |
| Message-ID: | 46287543.6070501@sulechow.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
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 question:
>
> Any chance that's happening? If this happens with SysV semaphores, will
> they error out, or just say it was done and do nothing? (meaning should we
> actuallyi be ignoring this error on windows?)
>
Hmm, PGSemaphoreUnlock() actually ignore this error, only log that it
happens. As I mentioned previously after it happens others connections
were hung on update operations. What is strange we cannot reproduce this
problem on Linux. But we can do this on Windows. What another
information should we provide?
Regards, Marcin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-04-20 08:12:14 | Re: BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298 |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-04-20 07:51:10 | Re: BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-04-20 08:12:14 | Re: BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298 |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-04-20 07:51:10 | Re: BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298 |