Re: 7.4Beta1 "failed to create socket: Address family not

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Creager <Robert_Creager(at)LogicalChaos(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 7.4Beta1 "failed to create socket: Address family not
Date: 2003-08-12 14:12:44
Message-ID: 1391.1060697564@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> But I still wonder whether we shouldn't suppress the message entirely,
>> at least for EAFNOSUPPORT errors.

> If we suppress it entirely, there is no user-visible report that IPv6
> isn't enabled on this computer, though if your kernel doesn't support
> it, you would think they would know that, but I suspect many people
> don't know it has to be enabled in the kernel --- hence the wording of
> the original message.

I don't see your point at all. If they don't have IPv6 enabled in the
kernel, they don't need it. Or if they do, Postgres launch is surely
not going to be the place where they discover they need it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shridhar Daithankar 2003-08-12 14:14:33 Re: Timestamp with zero precision
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-08-12 14:07:18 Re: 7.4Beta1 "failed to create socket: Address family not