This is a discussion on oldish libpq bug still in RC2 within the pgsql Hackers forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> It seems that this bug is still lurking in libpq: http://search.postgresql.org/pgsql-h...9/msg00703.php Is anybody working on it, or should I ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| It seems that this bug is still lurking in libpq: http://search.postgresql.org/pgsql-h...9/msg00703.php Is anybody working on it, or should I try something myself, perhaps just replacing the lone recv() with pqsecure_read() ? -- Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match |
| |||
| Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> writes: > It seems that this bug is still lurking in libpq: > http://search.postgresql.org/pgsql-h...9/msg00703.php > Is anybody working on it, or should I try something myself, perhaps just > replacing the lone recv() with pqsecure_read() ? Go for it. The difficulty I think is testing that the failure path actually does the right thing. Do you have the ability to provoke the failure on demand? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend |
| |||
| This item still seems open. Is it a TODO? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hannu Krosing wrote: > It seems that this bug is still lurking in libpq: > > http://search.postgresql.org/pgsql-h...9/msg00703.php > > Is anybody working on it, or should I try something myself, perhaps just > replacing the lone recv() with pqsecure_read() ? > > -- > Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your > joining column's datatypes do not match > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend |
| |||
| Ühel kenal päeval (kolmapäev, 22. detsember 2004, 11:34-0500), kirjutas Tom Lane: > Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> writes: > > It seems that this bug is still lurking in libpq: > > http://search.postgresql.org/pgsql-h...9/msg00703.php > > > Is anybody working on it, or should I try something myself, perhaps just > > replacing the lone recv() with pqsecure_read() ? > > Go for it. The difficulty I think is testing that the failure path > actually does the right thing. Do you have the ability to provoke > the failure on demand? the easiest way to provoke it is running the following code in a python interpreter ---8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<-- import socket HOST = '' PORT = 5555 def close_on_connect_server(): s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM) s.bind((HOST, PORT)) s.listen(1) conn, addr = s.accept() print 'Connected by', addr conn.close() close_on_connect_server() ---8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<-- and then connect to it with psql $ psql -h 127.0.0.1 -p 5555 anydb this causes the python function to terminate and psql will start using all available CPU in tight recv() loop. I'm not sure I will get around to fixing it very soon , though I hoped I can. -- Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html |
| |||
| Ühel kenal päeval (esmaspäev, 3. jaanuar 2005, 22:29-0500), kirjutas Bruce Momjian: > This item still seems open. Is it a TODO? Probably. It bit me quite badly when it was discovered. I'm hoping to get something done&tested by tomorrow evenning the latest. -- Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend |
| ||||
| Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> writes: > Tom Lane: >> Go for it. The difficulty I think is testing that the failure path >> actually does the right thing. Do you have the ability to provoke >> the failure on demand? > the easiest way to provoke it is running the following code in a python > interpreter Ah, of course. Thanks for the test scaffold. I have checked and committed a fix. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster |