Re: PostgreSQL on Cygwin - Mailing list pgsql-cygwin
From | Jason Tishler |
---|---|
Subject | Re: PostgreSQL on Cygwin |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20010710154349.B320@dothill.com Whole thread Raw |
Responses |
ODBC calls seem surprisingly slow...
|
List | pgsql-cygwin |
Terry, [Sorry for the sluggish response time -- those pesky holidays and vacations are always getting in the way...] On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 09:11:09PM +0000, Terry Carlin wrote: > On 7/4/01, 3:31:37 PM, Jason.Tishler@dothill.com (Jason Tishler) wrote > regarding Re: PostgreSQL on Cygwin: > > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 09:08:09PM +0000, Terry Carlin wrote: > > > I posted this message on the postgresql.ports.cygwin list and have not > > > heard anything from anybody. Tom Lane suggested that I contact you > > > directly with this problem. > > > I monitor the pgsql-cygwin@postgresql.org mailing list very closely > > and I did not see any of your posts. To what mailing list does > > "postgresql.ports.cygwin" correspond? > > I don't subscribe to the mailing list, I posted to > comp.databases.postgresql.ports.cygwin news group. My guess is that comp.databases.postgresql.ports.cygwin is tied to pgsql-cygwin@postgresql.org and vice versa, but it appears that messages get lost between the two occasionally. Given your current role, I would recommend subscribing to pgsql-ports and pgsql-cygwin -- the traffic is fairly light. > > My WAG is that you have found a Cygwin resource leak -- my best guess is > > open handles. Since the activity of a benchmark application is by its > > very nature intensive and "long lived" as compared to someone typing > > away at bash, it would be much more likely for you to stumble over a > > resource leak than the typical Cygwin user. > > This is why I was running the benchmarks against PostgreSQL on CYGWIN. > > > Try adding more columns (e.g, Handle Count) in Task Manager to determine > > whether or not my hypothesis is correct. Another option is to use > > Performance Monitor. > > I added the Handle Count to the Task Manager and found some interesting > stuff. These are the memory and handle statistics from this run. > > This machine has 256 mb ram > PostgreSQL Memory size Process 1 6,632k, # of handles 756,889 > PostgreSQL Memory size Process 2 6,636k, # of handles 474,435 > PostgreSQL Memory size Process 3 6,640k, # of handles 247,353 > PostgreSQL Memory size Process 4 6,632k, # of handles 56,515 > Does look like we ran out of handles I would like to reproduce your resource leak problem without using Benchmark Factory. Can you suggest a way to "emulate" your testing by driving psql or using JDBC? If I can reproduce the problem, then I may be able to plug the leak. If so, then I will submit a patch to Cygwin for consideration. Otherwise, I can post a hopefully minimal test case that demonstrates the problem to the core Cygwin developers. Thanks, Jason -- Jason Tishler Director, Software Engineering Phone: 732.264.8770 x235 Dot Hill Systems Corp. Fax: 732.264.8798 82 Bethany Road, Suite 7 Email: Jason.Tishler@dothill.com Hazlet, NJ 07730 USA WWW: http://www.dothill.com
pgsql-cygwin by date: