| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji? |
| Date: | 2007-05-14 13:54:40 |
| Message-ID: | 20070514135440.GH20472@svr2.hagander.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 09:34:05AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 09:02:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >>Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> >>
> >>>If all we want to do is add a check that prevents two servers to start on
> >>>the same port, we could do that trivially in a win32 specific way (since
> >>>we'll never have unix sockets there). Just create an object in the global
> >>>namespace named postgresql.interlock.<portnumber> or such a thing.
> >>>
> >>Does it go away automatically on postmaster crash?
> >>
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Then I think it's worth adding, and I'd argue that as a low risk safety
> measure we should allow it to sneak into 8.3. I'm assuming the code
> involved will be quite small.
Yes, see attached.
BTW, did you mean 8.2? One typical case where this could happen is in an
upgrade scenario, I think...
//Magnus
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| win32_interlock.patch | text/plain | 1.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2007-05-14 13:57:28 | Re: Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-05-14 13:53:38 | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji? |