Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We're seeing a problem where occasionally a process appears to be granted a
lock but miss its semaphore signal.
Kernel bug maybe?
Gregory Stark wrote:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We're seeing a problem where occasionally a process appears to be granted
a
lock but miss its semaphore
April Lorenzen wrote:
I had to feel my way carrying out this fix, and I don't know if I did
it right - I only know that it appears I no longer have the error.
Please confirm whether I was supposed to execute all of
share/information_schema.sql --- or just the portion that CREATEs or
REPLACEs
2007/8/12, Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We're seeing a problem where occasionally a process appears to be
granted a
lock but miss its semaphore signal.
Kernel
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've written a synthetic test program to check for lost semaphore wakeups.
Seems to me this proves nothing much, since it doesn't use the same SysV
semaphore API PG does. Please adjust so that it looks more like our
code --- in particular there should be
Hi,
Am Samstag, 11. Aug 2007, 19:57:59 -0400 schrieb Andrew Dunstan:
You say you read the Developers FAQ, but you clearly ignored this entry:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_DEV.html#item1.4
[...] you didn't seem to understand [...]
Yes. I ignore and I don't understand. Thanks.
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've written a synthetic test program to check for lost semaphore wakeups.
Seems to me this proves nothing much, since it doesn't use the same SysV
semaphore API PG does. Please adjust so that it looks more like our
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Seems to me this proves nothing much, since it doesn't use the same SysV
semaphore API PG does.
I was trying to copy the semaphore API exactly assuming
USE_NAMED_POSIX_SEMAPHORES was *not* defined. According to the
I wrote:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We could also only do the realloc-in-place only if there isn't a 4k chunk in
the 4k freelist. I'm imagining that usually there wouldn't be.
Or in general, if there's a free chunk of the right size then copy to
it, else consider
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Is this what we want? Arguably regexp_split is doing the most
reasonable thing for its intended usage, but the strict definition of
regexp matching seems to require what regexp_matches does. I think
we need to
10 matches
Mail list logo