Re: [HACKERS] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu]
Added to TODO: o Prevent SSL from sending network packets to avoid interference with Win32 signal emulation http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00455.php --- Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 12:30:50AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > "Trevor Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On 12/11/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I dunno anything about how to fix the real problem (what's winsock error > > >> 10004?), > > > > > WSAEINTR, "A blocking operation was interrupted by a call to > > > WSACancelBlockingCall." > > > > Oh, then it's exactly the same thing as our bug #2829. > > > > I opined in that thread that OpenSSL was broken because it failed to > > treat this as a retryable case like EINTR. But not being much of a > > Windows person, that might be mere hot air. Someone with a Windows > > build environment should try patching OpenSSL to treat WSAEINTR > > the same as Unix EINTR and see what happens ... > > When I last looked at this (and this was some time ago), I suspected (and > still do) that the problem is in the interaction between our > socket-emulation-stuff (for signals) and openssl. I'm not entirely sure, > but I wanted to rewrite the SSL code so that *our* code is responsible for > aclling the actuall send()/recv(), and not OpenSSL. This would also fix the > fact that if an OpenSSL network operation ends up blocking, that process > can't receive any signals... > > I didn't have time to get this done before feature-freeze though, and I > beleive the changes are large enough to qualify as such.. > > //Magnus > > ---(end of broadcast)--- > TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu]
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 12:30:50AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Trevor Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On 12/11/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I dunno anything about how to fix the real problem (what's winsock error > >> 10004?), > > > WSAEINTR, "A blocking operation was interrupted by a call to > > WSACancelBlockingCall." > > Oh, then it's exactly the same thing as our bug #2829. > > I opined in that thread that OpenSSL was broken because it failed to > treat this as a retryable case like EINTR. But not being much of a > Windows person, that might be mere hot air. Someone with a Windows > build environment should try patching OpenSSL to treat WSAEINTR > the same as Unix EINTR and see what happens ... When I last looked at this (and this was some time ago), I suspected (and still do) that the problem is in the interaction between our socket-emulation-stuff (for signals) and openssl. I'm not entirely sure, but I wanted to rewrite the SSL code so that *our* code is responsible for aclling the actuall send()/recv(), and not OpenSSL. This would also fix the fact that if an OpenSSL network operation ends up blocking, that process can't receive any signals... I didn't have time to get this done before feature-freeze though, and I beleive the changes are large enough to qualify as such.. //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu]
"Trevor Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 12/11/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I dunno anything about how to fix the real problem (what's winsock error >> 10004?), > WSAEINTR, "A blocking operation was interrupted by a call to > WSACancelBlockingCall." Oh, then it's exactly the same thing as our bug #2829. I opined in that thread that OpenSSL was broken because it failed to treat this as a retryable case like EINTR. But not being much of a Windows person, that might be mere hot air. Someone with a Windows build environment should try patching OpenSSL to treat WSAEINTR the same as Unix EINTR and see what happens ... regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu]
On 12/11/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I dunno anything about how to fix the real problem (what's winsock error > 10004?), but I don't think he'd be seeing full speed log filling in > 8.2.5. WSAEINTR, "A blocking operation was interrupted by a call to WSACancelBlockingCall." Offhand I'd take it as either not entirely sane usage of a network API, or one of the so very many broken software firewalls / network security products. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu]
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This guy is using 8.2.5. SSL seems to be able to fill his log files at > full speed. Are you *sure* the server is 8.2.5? 8.2.5 shouldn't emit duplicate messages, but 8.2.4 and before would: 2007-05-17 21:20 tgl * src/backend/libpq/: be-secure.c (REL7_4_STABLE), be-secure.c (REL8_1_STABLE), be-secure.c (REL8_0_STABLE), be-secure.c (REL8_2_STABLE), be-secure.c: Remove redundant logging of send failures when SSL is in use. While pqcomm.c had been taught not to do that ages ago, the SSL code was helpfully bleating anyway. Resolves some recent reports such as bug #3266; however the underlying cause of the related bug #2829 is still unclear. Furthermore, it looks to me like "SSL SYSCALL error: %m" doesn't exist anymore since that patch, so my bogometer is buzzing loudly. I dunno anything about how to fix the real problem (what's winsock error 10004?), but I don't think he'd be seeing full speed log filling in 8.2.5. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
[HACKERS] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu]
Hi, Here's another problem report on Windows. This time it is usage of SSL connections and NOTIFY. I talked to Magnus on IRC and he directed me to bug #2829: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-12/msg00122.php This report seems to be a little different, if only because the reported error string from SSL mentions an "Unknown winsock error 10004". This guy is using 8.2.5. SSL seems to be able to fill his log files at full speed. Is this an issue we can do something about? - Forwarded message from Henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - From: Henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Postgres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 03:34:04 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [pgsql-es-ayuda] SLL error 100% cpu Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > Henry escribió: > > buenas a todos los listeros. > > > > ya puse a produccion SSL con postgresql, y la > > performance se va degradando mientras se va > usando, > > procesos de CPU ocupa el 100% y cuando bajo el > > Servicio quedan alguno postgres.exe colgados, > > desactive la escritura de Log, porque se creaban > > demasiados archivos log con el texto de SYSCALL > > ERROR... , que raro pero hasta se creo > un > > archivo de 14MB (ke raro, si esta configurado > hasta > > 10MB solamente). - > Puedes mandar un extracto de ese archivo gigante? > Unas cuantas lineas > de ese SYSCALL ERROR. -- aqui esta: LOG: SSL SYSCALL error: Unknown winsock error 10004 saludos __ ¿Chef por primera vez? Sé un mejor Cocinillas. http://es.answers.yahoo.com/info/welcome - End forwarded message - -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC It does it in a really, really complicated way why does it need to be complicated? Because it's MakeMaker. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
