On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 01:07:18PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Tom Pfau" <T.Pfau@emCrit.com> writes:
> > In any case, if I run my test procedure which just performs updates to a
> > random column of a random row of a 1000 row table, I can watch the
> > handle usage continue to rise on the backend process.
> > Looking a bit more closely now, a single process doesn't seem to cause a
> > problem. Running two or more copies simultaneously causes the backends
> > to continuously consume handles. If I stop one of the processes, the
> > other stops losing handles.
>
> Unsurprisingly, I don't see any such problem under Unix (HPUX to be
> specific, but I'd be astonished to see PG on any Unix do that,
> considering that each backend manages its open files independently).
>
> I think you must be looking at some misbehavior of the Cygwin layer.
> If the problem really did go away in 7.1.3, perhaps some fix was applied
> by the Cygwin packager and not contributed back to the main code base.
I only include patches to the standard Cygwin PostgreSQL distribution
that have been accepted into CVS. [1] I'm too lazy to maintain private
patches for the long haul... :,) So, whatever is in Cygwin PostgreSQL
7.1.3 should be in 7.2.
[1] To be more precise, there are one or two instances where the version
of the patch in CVS was later tweaked for other platforms, but I continued
to use the initial version.
> But it's got to be a Cygwin bug anyway; the most we could do is find
> some workaround to avoid triggering it.
Without any investigation, I would tend to agree with the above. Tom
(Pfau), please try to find a minimal test for submission to the Cygwin
mailing list.
Thanks,
Jason