Re: file-locking and postmaster.pid

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak(at)officenet(dot)no>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: file-locking and postmaster.pid
Date: 2006-05-25 14:10:41
Message-ID: 12640.1148566241@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak(at)officenet(dot)no> writes:
> What I don't get is why everybody think that because one solution doesn't fit
> all needs on all platforms(or NFS), it shouldn't be implemented on those
> platforms it *does* work on.

(1) Because we're not really interested in supporting multiple fundamentally
different approaches to postmaster interlocking. The system is
complicated enough already.

(2) Because according to discussion so far, we can't rely on this "solution"
anywhere. Postgres can't easily tell whether its data directory is
mounted over NFS, for example.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-05-25 14:13:16 Re: Rename standard_conforming_strings to standard_strings
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-05-25 14:03:38 Re: problem with PQsendQuery/PQgetResult and COPY FROM statement