"Steve Howe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> (Thinks for awhile...) You're not using PQsetnonblocking() are you,
>> by any chance?
> No, I'm not.
Drat, another perfectly good theory down the drain :-(.
Well, we're not going to find out anymore until we discover what the
error code actually is --- the "errno=0" bogosity isn't helping.
As Bruce mentioned, we did just commit a patch that #defines errno
as WSAGetLastError() on WIN32, so that you can get at least something
useful about socket errors. I'd suggest pulling the current CVS sources
(or a nightly snapshot tarball dated after today) and building libpq
from that. Then maybe we can learn more.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
- [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Steve Howe
- [HACKERS] Re: Large queries - again... Eduardo Stern
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Steve Howe
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Steve Howe
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Steve Howe
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Steve Howe
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Steve Howe
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Jan Wieck
- Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again... Steve Howe
