On Dec 11 09:02, xmoon 2000 wrote: > On 8 December 2014 at 16:27, Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cyg...@cygwin.com> > wrote: > > On Dec 8 16:03, xmoon 2000 wrote: > >> On 8 December 2014 at 15:50, Corinna Vinschen <> wrote: > >> > On Dec 8 14:48, xmoon 2000 wrote: > >> >> On 8 December 2014 at 14:40, Corinna Vinschen <> wrote: > >> >> > On Dec 8 12:40, xmoon 2000 wrote: > >> >> >> I have set proc_retry = 10. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I still get the following error message but showing rety 10: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> 0 [main] sh 35392 fork: child -1 - forked process 35736 died > >> >> >> unexpectedly, retry 10, exit code 0xC0000005, errno 11 > >> >> >> /q/onlyPastEnd.sh: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Does this mean it got an error and cygwin will now retry 10 times? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> OR does it mean it retry-ed 10 and failed? > >> >> > > >> >> > It tried 10 times and failed. > >> >> > >> >> Are you certain about that? > >> > > >> > No. Sorry, it's the other way around. If retry is 10, no retry > >> > occured. AFAICS that's because you get an C000005 status code, which is > >> > STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION. In case of this error code, Cygwin does > >> > explicitely not retry. > >> > >> Do this suggest that I need to do the rebaseall - as documented in: > >> http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/cygwin-x-faq.html#q-fork-failures > > > > You can try, but this looks a bit different. A SEGV at fork time could > > be a bug in Cygwin or a result of having another Cygwin DLL in the path > > for some reason. > > I tried "rebasing" but with no luck. > > The problem appears when I am running 60 scripts in parallel on a 32 > core machine. Plus, each script runs subscripts with several pipes. > So, I think this is a "too many processes" type of issue.
It's a SEGV. It's probably not related to having too many processes. Cygwin processes only care for their immediate child processes usually and there's a restriction to 256 or so. > Usually, windows handle my "over-coring" well and my machine just > works through what it needs to do. But when I try this from Cygwin, it > seems to cause issues. > > Any thoughts or suggest for how I could get around this? Apart from BLODA influence, or apart from debugging what causes the SEGV, no. If you can provide a simple testcase, stripped to the bare minimum of code to reproduce the issue, it may help. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
pgpO3b6xBDSW7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
