Re: Unresolved Win32 bug reports

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Unresolved Win32 bug reports
Date: 2006-04-20 18:06:30
Message-ID: 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0F91F@algol.sollentuna.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > > pgbench) just stops doing work (CPU usage drops to
> nothing, as does
> > > disk activity). I've been able to repro this on 2 Intel
> boxes (one a
> > > 2 way, one a 4 way), and a dual Opteron, all running the
> latest windows binary.
> > > A 50 connection test running 1000 transactions is pretty much
> > > ensured to fail.
> >
> > Well, this sounds like a dead-lock, the obvious step would be to
> > attached gdb to both and get a stack-trace...
>
> Any pointers on how to get that setup? IS gdb part of the
> mingw runtime?

Yes. It's quite crappy compared to on unix though - I've never been able
to make it do the right thing all the way :-(

> BTW, this appears to be readily reproducable, so it might be
> a lot more productive for one of the windows hackers to test
> this themselves...

It reuqires a multi-CPU box, right? I don't hav eone with pgwin32 on
ATM. Do you know if it's enough with hyperthreading?

//Magnus

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-04-20 18:14:02 Re: TODO item pg_hba.conf
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-04-20 18:01:35 Re: Google SoC--Idea Request