On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 11:25:21 +0530 Kapil Hari Paranjape <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem in your case is that the child processes "refuse" to shut > down. That is quite unusual. Let me see if I can figure out why. Good luck; if I can run any diagnostics here, please ask. > > This bug has had a "major effect" on my system. > > Please upgrade the severity as you feel appropriate. I just lowered > the severity because I thought the problems were related and wanted > to merge the bugs. If the bugs are the same and my severity rating was appropriate, then both bugs should be 'important'. Is that OK with you? There's not many "me too" reports; looks like this bug isn't biting everyone. Maybe it's correlated to hardware, perhaps 'index++' calls 'gs' in some way that activates a 'gs' bug; perhaps a memory leak, which might seem OK on a 4GB RAM system, but fails on my 512MB. > My basic remark about "who is responsible for long running cron jobs" > being a difficult decision (see the other bug report) still applies. Agreed, I'd like to reply to your 2/15 request for feedback, but need to think about it a little more. I suspect the difficulty is more practical, (difficult to implement, requiring developer cooperation), rather than theoretical, (preventing/recognizing resource hogging & defining what constitutes a crash). HTH... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
