From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "William ZHANG" <uniware(at)zedware(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Win32 max connections bug (causing crashes) |
Date: | 2006-08-10 16:25:27 |
Message-ID: | b42b73150608100925u67d6b5e7p9083d9769f8d57c8@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/10/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "William ZHANG" <uniware(at)zedware(dot)org> writes:
> > Maybe this article can help:
> > Windows and the ClearCase process limit: Understanding the desktop heap
> > http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/05/1220_marechal/
>
> So the short answer is "get a real operating system"?
changing a registry setting is not terrible in and of itself, akin to
manually manipluating procfs, but the behavior is in a failure
condition is. other than that, no comment. personally all my servers
are running mixture of gentoo and centos and i'm moving my desktop to
mac os x.
> I'm not sure I believe that article though, since it claims that the
> default maximum number of noninteractive processes is only 79.
> I thought from what was said upthread that we could get up to a couple
> hundred before seeing a problem.
that would depend on various factors, especially exactly how many
resources the ibm server software ate up for each connection. pg seems
to be leaner and meaner fwiw. anyways, i confirmed the fix.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-10 16:31:52 | Re: libpq Describe Extension [WAS: Bytea and perl] |
Previous Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2006-08-10 16:14:38 | Re: libpq Describe Extension [WAS: Bytea and perl] |