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

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(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 14:30:38
Message-ID: 200308121430.h7CEUck16315@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote:
> 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.

That's a good point. Will they find they don't have IPv6 enabled in the
kernel before trying to make an IPv6 connection, perhaps from another
machine or from the local machine?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dobrica Pavlinusic 2003-08-12 14:51:51 Re: dbmirror -- recovery question
Previous Message Roderick A. Anderson 2003-08-12 14:26:17 Re: Update of foreign key values