From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji? |
Date: | 2007-05-14 13:41:02 |
Message-ID: | 9561.1179150062@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I'm curious as to which Unix systems allow multiple processes to listen
>> on the same port at the same time.. On Linux, and I thought on most,
>> you get an EADDRINUSE on the listen() call (which the postmaster should
>> pick up on and bomb out, which it may already).
> Linux certainly does.
Mmm, you're right, I misread the man page:
Setting the SO_REUSEADDR option allows the local socket address to be
reused in subsequent calls to bind(). This permits multiple
SOCK_STREAM sockets to be bound to the same local address, as long as
all existing sockets with the desired local address are in a connected
state before bind() is called for a new socket.
The bit about "connected state" is relevant here --- a listening socket
isn't connected. Time for more caffeine.
> Windows seems to treat SO_REUSEADDR in the same
> way as SO_REUSEPORT which just seems wrong.
Well, Microsoft getting standards wrong is no surprise. So what do we
want to do about it?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-05-14 13:41:25 | Re: Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-05-14 13:34:21 | Re: Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages |