This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: last snapshot (2011-03-13)
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:02:47 -0400
- Subject: Re: last snapshot (2011-03-13)
- References: <email@example.com>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:43:40PM +0100, EXCOFFIER Denis wrote:
>This follows http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2011-03/msg00563.html
>> Maybe it has something to do with the nonpaged pool size? MSDN states:
>> "Every time a named pipe is created, the system creates the inbound
>> and/or outbound buffers using nonpaged pool, which is the physical
>> memory used by the kernel. [...]
>> The input and output buffer sizes are advisory. The actual buffer
>> size reserved for each end of the named pipe is either the system
>> default, the system minimum or maximum, or the specified size rounded
>> up to the next allocation boundary. The buffer size specified should
>> be small enough that your process will not run out of nonpaged pool,
>> but large enough to accommodate typical requests."
>We could be in the right direction: i've open "Task manager" on both
>machines and the non-failing one has "Nonpaged=98Mb" and the
>failing one has "Nonpaged=36Mb" (only). Of course, these values are
>constantly moving, but seem to remain within an interval of a few Mb.
Sorry. The lack of threading and over-cutting of comments has me a
little confused. AFAICT, we're now responding to my comment:
>On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:31:15 -0400 cgf wrote:
>>I suppose that was because the buffer size was too large for their
>>system to handle.
Or, are you saying that you still see failures when setting the buffer
size down to 64K?
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple