From: | Tim Holloway <mtsinc(at)southeast(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] pid file for postmaster? |
Date: | 1999-11-25 16:32:23 |
Message-ID: | 383D6497.6FD95CE8@southeast.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
You are quite correct. They assume that there will be one and only one
postmaster, which may be started or stopped at runlevel switch or
manually via /etc/rc.d/init.d/postmaster stop|start|restart
Similar systems have made PIDfiles like:
/var/run/postgres/5432
Which would get around the single-postmaster limitation and allow you to
make postgres own the PID directory. Whether this has traversal-rights
issues or not, I don't know. Red Hat control starts the postmaster as an
'su' process from root, and they may do the WRITING of the PIDfile from
that account.
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Tim Holloway <mtsinc(at)southeast(dot)net> writes:
> > Red Hat ALREADY creates a file "postmaster.pid" in the /var/lock directory.
>
> If they did it just like that, then they broke the ability to run more
> than one postmaster on the same machine. Also, there is the question
> of what the permissions are on /var/lock. If they're tight then postgres
> can't be an ordinary unprivileged user, which is bad. If they're loose
> then anyone can come along and cause trouble by fiddling with the lock
> files.
>
> There was considerable discussion of this whole area last year in
> pg-hackers (check the thread "flock patch breaks things here" and
> related threads starting in late Aug. 1998). We were focusing mostly
> on the use of lockfiles to ensure that one didn't accidentally start
> two postmasters in the same database dir and/or with the same port
> number; but if the lockfiles contain PIDs then of course they can also
> serve as a contact point for a signal-sender.
>
> Tatsuo, if you have forgotten that discussion you may want to go back
> and re-read it.
>
> regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | mascarm | 1999-11-25 17:12:44 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] ':' and ';' operators |
Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 1999-11-25 16:02:57 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] ':' and ';' operators |