| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Gerhard Leykam" <gel123(at)sealsystems(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal |
| Date: | 2009-10-15 17:34:15 |
| Message-ID: | 10645.1255628055@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Suppose that after the postmaster is fully up, it writes a file
>> $PGDATA/postmaster.ports, with contents along the lines of
>>
>> 5432
>> /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432
> The listen_addresses setting would need to figure in, too.
Yeah, I'm not entirely sure how we'd want to deal with IP addresses,
but in principle there could be a line for each postmaster socket not
only the Unix-domain socket.
> This seems likely to overlap the review I was soon going to do of the
> differences between pg_ctl behavior and what is required for LSB
> conformance.
Agreed, it would be good to do a holistic review of what pg_ctl needs.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-10-15 17:41:01 | Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-10-15 16:51:54 | Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal |