Andrew Dunstan napsal(a):
Even at 32 this hardly seems to be a likely cause of the problem. I
think the maximum parallelism of our tests is around 20. Anyway, lets's
get the patch installed - I have a test regime set up that will
reproduce the error moderately reliably within about a dozen or
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
Zdenek,
However what happened? I think that following scenarios occurred.
Postmaster listen only in one process and there are many clients run
really parallel. T2000 server has 32 threads ( 8 core and each has 4
threads). These clients generate more TCP/
Josh Berkus wrote:
Zdenek,
However what happened? I think that following scenarios occurred.
Postmaster listen only in one process and there are many clients run
really parallel. T2000 server has 32 threads ( 8 core and each has 4
threads). These clients generate more TCP/IP request at one time
Josh Berkus napsal(a):
Zdenek,
However what happened? I think that following scenarios occurred.
Postmaster listen only in one process and there are many clients run
really parallel. T2000 server has 32 threads ( 8 core and each has 4
threads). These clients generate more TCP/IP request at one
Zdenek,
> However what happened? I think that following scenarios occurred.
> Postmaster listen only in one process and there are many clients run
> really parallel. T2000 server has 32 threads ( 8 core and each has 4
> threads). These clients generate more TCP/IP request at one time, than
> postm
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
I see one occurrence in the 8.1 branch on hyena, but the failure
probability seems to have jumped way up in HEAD since we put in the
C-coded pg_regress. This lends weight to the idea that it's a
timing-related issue, because pg_regress.c is presumably mu
Tom Lane wrote:
I see one occurrence in the 8.1 branch on hyena, but the failure
probability seems to have jumped way up in HEAD since we put in the
C-coded pg_regress. This lends weight to the idea that it's a
timing-related issue, because pg_regress.c is presumably much faster
at forking of
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> AFAIK it is not possible for Postgres itself to cause a "connection
>> refused" failure --- that's a kernel-level errno. So what's going on
>> here? The only idea that comes to mind is that this version of Solaris
>> has some very lo
Tom Lane wrote:
I'm noticing that buildfarm member hyena sometimes fails the parallel
regression tests, for instance
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=hyena&dt=2006-07-19%2009:20:00
The symptom is always that one of the tests fails entirely because
psql couldn't connect:
psql
I'm noticing that buildfarm member hyena sometimes fails the parallel
regression tests, for instance
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=hyena&dt=2006-07-19%2009:20:00
The symptom is always that one of the tests fails entirely because
psql couldn't connect:
psql: could not connect t
10 matches
Mail list logo
