I just had the same thing happen last night after trying a bunch of reductions on a large set of data. All of a sudden all of my views were returning this error.
This morning I came back to what I was working on and had the same problem, all views were just returning this error. I restarted the couch service and everything seemed to be back on track. Next time it happens I will certainly look for these processes. I am running 1.1, once I am done with my work today I will try the same reductions and see if happens again. I just wanted to throw in that I saw this recently as well. Thanks, Michael On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Paul Davis <[email protected]>wrote: > When this happens can you do a "ps ax | grep couchjs" on the machine > hosting CouchDB? It sounds like you've hit the process limit (which is > configurable). Hard to say if this is because you have lots of > concurrent clients holding couchjs processes or if we're leaking them > out of the pool somehow. If you can show that there aren't any clients > holding them (ie, from view updates or long list calls) then I'd be > super intrigued to see if you can narrow it down to a test case. I've > heard a couple anecdotes about leakage here but never with enough > detail to start looking for a root cause. > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 5:26 AM, Martin Hewitt <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've put a log extract on Pastebin here: http://pastebin.com/PuJm08J0 > > > > Sorry, I'm not familiar with erlang, so I'm not sure which bits are > pertinent, and there may well be more than one error trace in there. > > > > Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > > > Martin > > > > On 11 Aug 2011, at 11:14, Martin Hewitt wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I'm getting the following error when trying to load some views: > >> > >> > {"error":"timeout","reason":"{gen_server,call,[couch_query_servers,{get_proc,<<\"javascript\">>}]}"} > >> > >> Googling around, it seems this issue has been "fixed" way before I even > started using CouchDB. Any ideas what could be causing it now? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Martin > > > > >
