Hello,
I will bring it up with the postgresql hackers.
PS - Sorry for the new posting. I read these via digest.
Mike * From: Jason Tishler <jason at tishler dot net> * To: cygwin at cygwin dot com * Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004
11:07:56-0400 * Subject: Re: Initdb FATAL error shmat - Win98 Cygwin 1.5.10-3 - PostgreSQL 7.4.3 * References:
<20040803133058.GS31522@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Corinna,
I apologize for the delay, but I was on vacation...
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 03:30:58PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> I tried it and it actually only happens on 9x. I found that postgres
> tries to shmat to an address which I have no idea about where it comes
> from. The problem with that address is, that it's neither a multiple
> of SHMLBA, nor does postgres call shmat with the SHM_RND flag. For
> some reason the address is ok on NT.
>
> So, Jason, do you have an idea why that happens?
No.
> Two questions come to mind:
>
> - How does postgres evaluate that address
I don't know.
> and why does it only fail on 9x?
Ditto.
> - Why does postgres use a fixed address at all, instead of using NULL
> to let the system decide which address to use?
Ditto.
I do not have access to Windows 9x and (unfortunately) have not used
PostgreSQL seriously for 3 years now, so I'm not particularly motivated
to work on this problem.
Sorry,
Jason
--
PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers
Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
