Unix Technical Forum

FET_BUF_SIZE and The Perl DBI

This is a discussion on FET_BUF_SIZE and The Perl DBI within the Informix forums, part of the Database Server Software category; --> Hi, I have a Perl script, using the DBI and DBD::Informix, and unloading data to disk. To reduce network ...


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > Informix

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2008, 10:11 PM
tvilliers
 
Posts: n/a
Default FET_BUF_SIZE and The Perl DBI

Hi,

I have a Perl script, using the DBI and DBD::Informix, and unloading data
to disk. To reduce network traffic, the FET_BUF_SIZE has been set to 16k,
but the script then dies with "Memory fault". I've set the "LongReadLen"
attribute of the db handle, but it does not seem to make any difference.
When FET_BUF_SIZE is unset, the script runs fine.

Is this a Perl (specific) problem?

uname -sr is "Linux 2.4.10-4GB"
perl's v is "5.6.1" with Compile-time options: USE_LARGE_FILES


Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2008, 10:12 PM
Jonathan Leffler
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: FET_BUF_SIZE and The Perl DBI

tvilliers wrote:
> I have a Perl script, using the DBI and DBD::Informix, and unloading data
> to disk. To reduce network traffic, the FET_BUF_SIZE has been set to 16k,
> but the script then dies with "Memory fault". I've set the "LongReadLen"
> attribute of the db handle, but it does not seem to make any difference.
> When FET_BUF_SIZE is unset, the script runs fine.
>
> Is this a Perl (specific) problem?
>
> uname -sr is "Linux 2.4.10-4GB"
> perl's v is "5.6.1" with Compile-time options: USE_LARGE_FILES



I've responded on the dbi-users@perl.org mailing list.

There's likely a bug in CSDK - it shouldn't be crashing.

There's also a bug in the use of "16k" (which was enclosed in quotes
in the posting to dbi-users!) - you should write 16384.

I suspect that the crash is because CSDK is using a null pointer
because the conversion of 16k is failing, or is producing the answer
16 and that is just too small. No proof; just a semi-plausible
conjecture.


--
Jonathan Leffler #include <disclaimer.h>
Email: jleffler@earthlink.net, jleffler@us.ibm.com
Guardian of DBD::Informix v2003.04 -- http://dbi.perl.org/

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
www.UnixAdminTalk.com