Re: pgbench bug / limitation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Jawarilal, Manish" <Manish(dot)Jawarilal(at)dell(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgbench bug / limitation
Date: 2020-06-02 00:21:27
Message-ID: 512846.1591057287@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I added the following line to the top of add_socket_to_set():
> printf("add_socket_to_set fd = %d\n", fd);

> However, on Windows, I get:
> add_socket_to_set fd = 392
> add_socket_to_set fd = 388
> add_socket_to_set fd = 408
> add_socket_to_set fd = 404
> add_socket_to_set fd = 412
> add_socket_to_set fd = 420

Interesting.

> Shouldn't: if (fd < 0 || fd >= FD_SETSIZE) just become: if (idx > FD_SETSIZE) ?

Certainly not, because it's the fd not the idx that is being added
into the fd_set. I am not too sure about the underlying implementation
on Windows, but on Unix-like OSes, FD_SETSIZE *is* the size of that bit
array. What you suggest would allow memory stomps.

Given your results, I'm guessing that we are indeed managing to increase
the fd_set size to 1024, but that's not enough to allow order-of-1000
connections because there are other things competing for FD identifiers.
Maybe we should just crank up the forced value of FD_SETSIZE (to, say,
8192)?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-06-02 00:56:54 Re: pgbench bug / limitation
Previous Message David Rowley 2020-06-02 00:07:12 Re: pgbench bug / limitation