Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

System V IPC is missing #1016

Closed
fehrin opened this issue Aug 30, 2016 · 12 comments
Closed

System V IPC is missing #1016

fehrin opened this issue Aug 30, 2016 · 12 comments

Comments

@fehrin
Copy link

fehrin commented Aug 30, 2016

When starting gvim i get
(gvim:2390): Gdk-WARNING **: shmget failed: error 38 (Function not implemented)
It seems that while Posix shared memory is present, System V IPC is still missing.

@russalex
Copy link
Contributor

Just to avoid any ambiguity, my comments on #61 are about the filesystem perf delta. We know there are issues there and are looking into it.

IPC is on the backlog but it is not showing up in our telemetry very often so not terribly high. That said, PostgreSQL is something we want to start testing with so it may bubble up the priority stack as we get to that point.

@fpqc
Copy link

fpqc commented Oct 17, 2016

@russalex Are you doing telemetry on Azure or on Win10 Insiders (or both?) to decide this kind of priority?

@russalex
Copy link
Contributor

We look mostly at telemetry from Insiders and a little at the Anniversary Update. We are trying to keep our finger on what the community is trying to run and the crashes / unimplemented syscalls which are blocking scenarios.

For items like PostgreSQL we generally look at comments here, input from folks within MSFT who work with developers, tweets, and blog / forum posts in places like stack overflow. We do talk with Azure on occasion but do not have a formal channel at this time.

More than happy to go a bit more into detail on our telemetry. It may make for a good blog post at some point.

@chesterm8
Copy link

If java uses the System V IPC to fork processes (which seems to be the root cause of #851) then this could be quite a significant issue.

@therealkenc
Copy link
Collaborator

No sorry to lead you astray on that. It's cloning with CLONE_SYSVSEM, but that's not what is causing the failure at the moment. That clone succeeds (message). It just looked like a red flag at the time I wrote the message, but you're dying on a different syscall.

@QinHuasong
Copy link

@therealkenc what should I do to solve the problem I mentioned in #1443 ?

@therealkenc
Copy link
Collaborator

therealkenc commented Dec 2, 2016

There isn't a lot you can do at the moment because the syscall surface just isn't there yet. If it's your own code you might consider using a different IPC mechanism for message queues. The reason SysV IPC isn't getting a lot of telemetry hits is because it just isn't used that much anymore (for some arbitrary value of "that much").

@QinHuasong
Copy link

@therealkenc Thanks for your answer. I've tried POSIX mq instead of sysV msgget, but error message still there. It says:
mq_open error(38 - Function not implemented).
where I print out the errno and error msg.
Any other suggestion?

@therealkenc
Copy link
Collaborator

Apologies; I should have been more clear. I meant use AF_NETLINK or AF_UNIX. [Why have one way to send some bytes between process domains when you can have half a dozen, right?] It's not as bad as it sounds if you already have your IPC abstracted somewhat in your code.

@benhillis
Copy link
Member

System V shared memory and semaphores were implemented in Creators Update. Message queues are on the backlog.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 5, 2017

The bug is thus closed benhillis?

I tried to start gvim, it works fine (I am using xming for the xorg-part on win10, which seems to work fine for most programs; I have a problem with kde konsole but I suppose I may file another issue eventually; It's only some days since I even started with win10 altogether, including the *nix subsystem).

@benhillis
Copy link
Member

Closing this, message queues are tracked by #1443.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants