Re: HELP < 63 users

From: "joek hondius" <jhondius(at)rem(dot)nl>
To: "'Jason Tishler'" <jason(at)tishler(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-cygwin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: HELP < 63 users
Date: 2002-08-29 10:11:11
Message-ID: 000001c24f44$66fe7dc0$28884fc1@voyager
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-cygwin

>Joek,
>
>On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 04:45:49PM +0200, joek hondius wrote:
>> I could not find any pointer to this in the cygwin or postgresql docs
>> about this. Jason Tishler noted this before in a review of why 'make
>> test' (parallel) failed (one year ago).
>
>I don't recall the above. Please provide an URL.

Somehow i could not find the original postings anymore (they where there 3
weeks ago),
but thanks to google's cache:
http://www.google.nl/search?q=cache:CXMBRFwDZUwC:postgresql.linux.cz/mhonarc
/pgsql-ports/2001-03/msg00128.html+&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8

This is just some part of the discussion however.

>
>Are you referring to the following (from the README)?
>
> 1. make check can generate spurious regression test failures due to
> overflowing the the listen() backlog queue which generates
> connection refused errors. Note that make installcheck does not
> have this problem since it runs all tests sequentially instead of in
> large concurrent groups.
>
>Jason

Of course i was referring to make check, not test (Ahum..),
But this is not a backlog problem.
Its seems to me to be a fork() to windows mapping problem. The
WaitForObject() winAPI call is limited to 63. So postgreSQL really seems
limited to 63 backends on cygwin. :(
I'm trying to get 200 concurrent users to work.

Joek

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-cygwin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message davedudd 2002-08-29 14:12:19 !!!!!!80!!!!
Previous Message Jason Tishler 2002-08-27 17:42:59 Re: HELP < 63 users