Re: Socket problem using beta2 on Windows-XP

Hmm. Bummer.

Anyway. The netstat indicates that the pipe() call works. The order is
pretty much:

parent: create socket pair, connected to each other.
parent: Duplicate socket [this is what fails]
parent: close own copy of socket
child: recreate socket from structure [this is never called, thus the
new socket is never "attached" to a process]

Now *why* it's doing this, I hav eno idea.

Questions:
1) Does it actually work? ;-) And just logs the error anyway?
2) Does this happen on *every* connection?
3) Can you reproduce this on a different machine, or just one?

//Magnus

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Hallgren [mailto:thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 9:48 AM
> To: Magnus Hagander
> Cc: PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Socket problem using beta2 on Windows-XP
>
> Nope, no anti-virus and no firewall (other then the box that
> fronts my home-network to the outside world).
>
> - thomas
>
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> >>Hi,
> >>I've installed PostgreSQL 8.1-beta2 as a service on my
> Windows-XP box.
> >>It runs fine but I get repeated messages like this in the log:
> >>
> >> 2005-09-29 00:41:09 FATAL: could not duplicate socket
> 1880 for use
> >>in backend: error code 10038
> >>
> >>and for each message printed, a new postgres process is created. To
> >>make things worse, those processes do not die when I stop
> the service.
> >>
> >>I use sysinternals tcpview to monitor my sockets. I know
> that no other
> >>process is using 1880. Each started postgres process will
> occupy two,
> >>seemingly random ports that apparently form a loop somehow.
> This is a
> >>typical entry:
> >>
> >> <non-existent>:3136 TCP 127.0.0.1:1554
> >>127.0.0.1:1555 ESTABLISHED
> >> <non-existent>:3136 TCP 127.0.0.1:1555
> >>127.0.0.1:1554 ESTABLISHED
> >>
> >>The weird thing is that there is no process with pid 3136
> (hence the
> >>name <non-existent>). There is a postgres process with
> another pid in
> >>my process listing. If I kill that, the <non-existstent> entries go
> >>away.
> >>
> >>Looks like pid 3136 is talking to itself. A pipe() followed
> by failure
> >>to start the new process perhaps?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Do you by any chance run any antivirus or firewall software?
> If so, can
> >you try removing it (note! actual uninstall, not just disabling it!)
> >
> >//Magnus
> >
> >
>
>
>