Re: [HACKERS] Dangling backends on win32 7.2.1 port (peerdirect).
Jan Wieck wrote:>PeerDirect tried to contribute the Win32 port portion of their work to >the open source project. >The PostgreSQL global development team has not>yet made any final decision if or what parts of that code will or will>not become part of the regular PostgreSQL distribution Bruce Momjian wrote:>Actually, I believe we have decided to use the PeerDirect code to do a>native Win32 port for 7.4. I just posted my first patch, and will spend>most of the next two months completing the job. Merlin Moncure wrote:>There is at least one show-stopping bug which I believe is related to>the shared memory emulation. I am almost 100% sure that the bug is in>the win32 side and if still present will carry over to the latest>release.>I offered to help find and catch it: but before I spend the time to do>that I'd like to at least know if the problem has already been>addressed. I was responding to the call for capable developers to help>test upcoming patch, posted on this very list about two weeks ago. We already use Psql on Linux via ODBC as a "big compatible MS Access RDBMS", with appropriate functions and operators (great!!). I think that a Win version of Postgres could easily replace this MS product for professional usages, and I can test it to do that. Many Win developers could receive benefits, could approach the OS world and Postgres could become more used than MySQL... (thank God!) I renew my aid as beta tester for a Win32 version, when it will be placed on the CVS repository, as already posted. Let me know...
Re: [HACKERS] Dangling backends on win32 7.2.1 port (peerdirect).
Jan Wieck wrote: > What exactly did you test? If it is the PeerDirect Beta version of > PostgreSQL for Windows named UltraSQL, please know that thus far there > has to my knowledge not been an offical, supported release of UltraSQL > yet - and since the company eliminated the group working on that port, I > doubt there ever will. I tested the binary released version and my own compiled version. I have been trying to compile the version that is patched to the latest official release but so far I've been having trouble getting that compiled. > > PeerDirect tried to contribute the Win32 port portion of their work to > the open source project. The PostgreSQL global development team has not > yet made any final decision if or what parts of that code will or will > not become part of the regular PostgreSQL distribution. > > So ... YOU DO NOT USE ANYTHING OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED BY US!!! > > Could you therefore calm down, stop shouting, comb your hair, get the > sources of the current work in progress and send in your > complains/suggestions in context diff format? Sorry, I didn't mean to offend. My understanding is that the UltraSQL patches are likely to go into general release when the source goes 7.4/8.0. There is at least one show-stopping bug which I believe is related to the shared memory emulation. I am almost 100% sure that the bug is in the win32 side and if still present will carry over to the latest release. I offered to help find and catch it: but before I spend the time to do that I'd like to at least know if the problem has already been addressed. I was responding to the call for capable developers to help test upcoming patch, posted on this very list about two weeks ago. I'm not asking for support but trying to help. Sorry to bother, Merlin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] Dangling backends on win32 7.2.1 port (peerdirect).
Jan Wieck wrote: > Merlin Moncure wrote: > > > > TRY TEST WIN32 PORT. DATABASE GO BOOM! TRY FIX NOBODY CARE. WIN32 > > PORT COME OUT MANY DATABASE GO BOOM! TRY HELP GET IGNORED. JUST WANT > > HELP. BUG FIX? > > Pardonne moi? > > What exactly did you test? If it is the PeerDirect Beta version of > PostgreSQL for Windows named UltraSQL, please know that thus far there > has to my knowledge not been an offical, supported release of UltraSQL > yet - and since the company eliminated the group working on that port, I > doubt there ever will. > > PeerDirect tried to contribute the Win32 port portion of their work to > the open source project. The PostgreSQL global development team has not > yet made any final decision if or what parts of that code will or will > not become part of the regular PostgreSQL distribution. Actually, I believe we have decided to use the PeerDirect code to do a native Win32 port for 7.4. I just posted my first patch, and will spend most of the next two months completing the job. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [HACKERS] Dangling backends on win32 7.2.1 port (peerdirect).
Merlin Moncure wrote: > > TRY TEST WIN32 PORT. DATABASE GO BOOM! TRY FIX NOBODY CARE. WIN32 > PORT COME OUT MANY DATABASE GO BOOM! TRY HELP GET IGNORED. JUST WANT > HELP. BUG FIX? Pardonne moi? What exactly did you test? If it is the PeerDirect Beta version of PostgreSQL for Windows named UltraSQL, please know that thus far there has to my knowledge not been an offical, supported release of UltraSQL yet - and since the company eliminated the group working on that port, I doubt there ever will. PeerDirect tried to contribute the Win32 port portion of their work to the open source project. The PostgreSQL global development team has not yet made any final decision if or what parts of that code will or will not become part of the regular PostgreSQL distribution. So ... YOU DO NOT USE ANYTHING OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED BY US!!! Could you therefore calm down, stop shouting, comb your hair, get the sources of the current work in progress and send in your complains/suggestions in context diff format? Have a nice day, Jan > > Regards, > Merlin > > ---(end of broadcast)--- > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- #==# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #== [EMAIL PROTECTED] # ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] Dangling backends on win32 7.2.1 port (peerdirect).
TRY TEST WIN32 PORT. DATABASE GO BOOM! TRY FIX NOBODY CARE. WIN32 PORT COME OUT MANY DATABASE GO BOOM! TRY HELP GET IGNORED. JUST WANT HELP. BUG FIX? Regards, Merlin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [HACKERS] Dangling backends on win32 7.2.1 port (peerdirect).
I wrote: > > Other times, I get the more ominous > DEBUG: rename from C:\postgres\peer_direct\data/pg_xlog/0003 > to C:\postgres\peer_direct\data/pg_xlog/000A (initialization > of log file 0, segment 10) failed: Permission denied. > > If this happens about 10 times I will have about 7 backends up with 6 > doing nothing and only 44k memory allocated for each. Killing the > client app kills all the backends. OK, I read the readme file and saw the note about the permission denied error, so I'm not crazy. However, there was no mention of the extra processes which seems to me to be a catastrophic side affect. The processes appear to be waiting on some sort of lock on the transaction files, and seem to be in some sort of limbo until the original connection is closed. I can create very reasonable conditions which will take a database down within a few hours. Has this been fixed? If not, I'm prepared to start slogging it out. The way I see it, a production database is 100% likely to shut down within a very short period of time (hours) unless special care is taken to reset all the database connections or at least TerminateProcess() dormant processes (yuck!). I know the peerdirect patches are being applied to the cvs version. Aside from this problem and the very silly divide by zero error, the win32 port has been very well behaved, with decent, if not great, performance. Merlin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
