On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Dave Page wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >> > We have already found that exceeding desktop heap might cause a >> > CreateProcess to return success but later fail with a return code of >> > 128, which causes a server restart. >> >> That doesn't mean that this is desktop heap exhaustion though - just >> that it can cause the same effect. > > Right, but it is the only possible server crash cause we have come up > with so far.
Understood - I'm just unconvinced it's the cause - aside from the point I made earlier about heap exhaustion being very predictable and reproducible (which this issue apparently is not), when the server is run under the SCM, it creates a logon session for that service alone which has it's own heap allocation which is entirely independent of the allocation used by any interactive logon sessions. So unless there's a major isolation bug in Windows, any desktop heap usage in an interactive session for one user should have zero effect on a non-interactive session for another user. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
