X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20BE1D967F for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:51:44 -0400 (AST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 77861-09 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 17:51:43 +0000 (GMT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7224CD7B8B for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:51:41 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jAHHpd3S029370; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:51:39 -0500 (EST) To: "Kevin Grittner" cc: zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu, mha@sollentuna.net, icub3d@gmail.com, pgsql-admin@postgresql.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: could not read block In-reply-to: <437C6BE802000025000007B7@gwmta.wicourts.gov> References: <437C6BE802000025000007B7@gwmta.wicourts.gov> Comments: In-reply-to "Kevin Grittner" message dated "Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:39:20 -0600" Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:51:39 -0500 Message-ID: <29369.1132249899@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.007 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.007] X-Spam-Score: 0.007 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200511/226 X-Sequence-Number: 19599 "Kevin Grittner" writes: > None of this seems material, however. It's pretty clear that the > problem was exhaustion of the Windows page pool. > ... > If we don't want to tell Windows users to make highly technical > changes to the Windows registry in order to use PostgreSQL, > it does seem wise to use retries, as has already been discussed > on this thread. Would a simple retry loop actually help? It's not clear to me how persistent such a failure would be. regards, tom lane