| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Trevor Talbot" <quension(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [hensa22@yahoo.es: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu] |
| Date: | 2007-12-12 05:30:50 |
| Message-ID: | 12357.1197437450@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Trevor Talbot" <quension(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 12/11/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I dunno anything about how to fix the real problem (what's winsock error
>> 10004?),
> WSAEINTR, "A blocking operation was interrupted by a call to
> WSACancelBlockingCall."
Oh, then it's exactly the same thing as our bug #2829.
I opined in that thread that OpenSSL was broken because it failed to
treat this as a retryable case like EINTR. But not being much of a
Windows person, that might be mere hot air. Someone with a Windows
build environment should try patching OpenSSL to treat WSAEINTR
the same as Unix EINTR and see what happens ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-12-12 07:06:39 | Re: There's random access and then there's random access |
| Previous Message | Trevor Talbot | 2007-12-12 05:13:37 | Re: [hensa22@yahoo.es: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu] |