| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: semaphore usage "port based"? |
| Date: | 2006-04-02 22:23:24 |
| Message-ID: | 25422.1144016604@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Or, more simply, I think ... is there somewhere in the Semaphore code that
> is using the port # as a 'seed'?
We use the port number as a basis for selecting the semaphore key (see
semget(2)). There is code in there to pick a different key value if the
one we first selected appears to be in use; that has to work correctly
if you're going to run multi postmasters on the same port number. It
sounds like FBSD 6 has done something that broke the key-in-use check.
Look at IpcSemaphoreCreate and InternalIpcSemaphoreCreate in
src/backend/port/sysv_sema.c. It may be worth stepping through them
with gdb to see what the semget calls are returning.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-02 22:36:28 | Re: semaphore usage "port based"? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-02 22:13:43 | Re: pg_class catalog question... |