Thread

1. 8.0.0 gmake check fails if on disk, passes on ram disk....

   Jeff Ross <jross@openvistas.net> — 2005-01-22T00:03:08Z

   Hi,
   
   If I put the source for 8.0.0 on disk (RAID 1) , configure, compile and 
   run gmake check, it fails with 33 errors, 30 of which are
   
   ! psql: could not send startup packet: Broken pipe
   
   If I put the same source code up on a ram disk, configure and compile it 
   the same way, all 96 tests pass.
   
   OS is OpenBSD 3.6.
   
   I'm currently running 7.3.5, which I'd love to upgrade but I'm a little 
   leary until I can determine what is causing this error.
   
   Any thoughts greatly appreciated!
   
   Jeff Ross
   
   

2. Re: 8.0.0 gmake check fails if on disk, passes on ram disk....

   Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org> — 2005-01-24T09:00:30Z

   On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:03:08PM -0700, Jeff Ross wrote:
   
   > If I put the source for 8.0.0 on disk (RAID 1) , configure, compile and 
   > run gmake check, it fails with 33 errors, 30 of which are
   > 
   > ! psql: could not send startup packet: Broken pipe
   
   Somebody else using OpenBSD reported a similar problem recently.
   Here's part of that thread:
   
   http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-01/msg00099.php
   
   > If I put the same source code up on a ram disk, configure and compile it 
   > the same way, all 96 tests pass.
   
   Interesting.  Is this behavior consistent?  What's different 'twixt
   the RAID disk and the RAM disk?
   
   -- 
   Michael Fuhr
   http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/
   
   

3. Re: 8.0.0 gmake check fails if on disk, passes on ram disk....

   Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2005-01-24T15:24:56Z

   Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org> writes:
   > On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:03:08PM -0700, Jeff Ross wrote:
   >> If I put the same source code up on a ram disk, configure and compile it 
   >> the same way, all 96 tests pass.
   
   > Interesting.  Is this behavior consistent?  What's different 'twixt
   > the RAID disk and the RAM disk?
   
   If the problem is at bottom a too low processes-per-user limit, as it
   was for Jean-Gerard, then maybe the RAM-disk case passes because of
   different timing details.  This theory is a bit of a stretch though.
   
   In any case, we're being shown the wrong output.  What I want to know is
   what appears in the postmaster log when these failures happen?
   
   			regards, tom lane
   
   

4. Re: 8.0.0 gmake check fails if on disk, passes on ram disk....

   Jeff Ross <jross@openvistas.net> — 2005-01-24T16:03:04Z

   Tom Lane wrote:
   > Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org> writes:
   > 
   >>On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:03:08PM -0700, Jeff Ross wrote:
   >>
   >>>If I put the same source code up on a ram disk, configure and compile it 
   >>>the same way, all 96 tests pass.
   > 
   > 
   >>Interesting.  Is this behavior consistent?  What's different 'twixt
   >>the RAID disk and the RAM disk?
   > 
   > 
   > If the problem is at bottom a too low processes-per-user limit, as it
   > was for Jean-Gerard, then maybe the RAM-disk case passes because of
   > different timing details.  This theory is a bit of a stretch though.
   > 
   > In any case, we're being shown the wrong output.  What I want to know is
   > what appears in the postmaster log when these failures happen?
   > 
   > 			regards, tom lane
   > 
   > ---------------------------(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
   > 
   > 
   I did a make clean, make, and gmake check this morning.  Fewer tests 
   failed (16 of the 96) on the raid1, and again no tests failed on the ram 
   disk.
   
   Rather than post it in the e-mail, I've put the postmaster.log at
   
   	http://www.openvistas.net/postmaster.log
   
   Thanks!
   
   
   

5. Re: 8.0.0 gmake check fails if on disk, passes on ram disk....

   Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2005-01-24T16:16:54Z

   Jeff Ross <jross@openvistas.net> writes:
   > Rather than post it in the e-mail, I've put the postmaster.log at
   > 	http://www.openvistas.net/postmaster.log
   
   I see multiple occurrences of
   
   LOG:  could not fork new process for connection: Resource temporarily unavailable
   
   so indeed your process limit is too low.  It's curious that OpenBSD
   seems more prone than other platforms to produce a "broken pipe" error
   instead of reporting the error message sent back by the postmaster ...
   but there is something of a race condition there, so we can't complain
   too much.
   
   I have no idea why running the tests off ramdisk would make a difference
   in the probability of this failure, but it's academic.  Raise your
   process limit.
   
   			regards, tom lane
   
   

6. Re: 8.0.0 gmake check fails if on disk, passes on ram disk....

   Jeff Ross <jross@openvistas.net> — 2005-01-24T16:33:27Z

   Tom Lane wrote:
   > Jeff Ross <jross@openvistas.net> writes:
   > 
   >>Rather than post it in the e-mail, I've put the postmaster.log at
   >>	http://www.openvistas.net/postmaster.log
   > 
   > 
   > I see multiple occurrences of
   > 
   > LOG:  could not fork new process for connection: Resource temporarily unavailable
   > 
   > so indeed your process limit is too low.  It's curious that OpenBSD
   > seems more prone than other platforms to produce a "broken pipe" error
   > instead of reporting the error message sent back by the postmaster ...
   > but there is something of a race condition there, so we can't complain
   > too much.
   > 
   > I have no idea why running the tests off ramdisk would make a difference
   > in the probability of this failure, but it's academic.  Raise your
   > process limit.
   > 
   > 			regards, tom lane
   > 
   > 
   
   Thank you, Tom! That was indeed the problem.
   
   Jeff Ross