From: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | 'Kyotaro Horiguchi' <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: pg_ctl start may return 0 even if the postmaster has been already started on Windows |
Date: | 2023-09-08 08:02:57 |
Message-ID: | TYAPR01MB5866E8D3942338637909743EF5EDA@TYAPR01MB5866.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Hoiguchi-san,
Thank you for making the patch!
> It doesn't seem to work as expected. We still lose the relationship
> between the PID file and the launched postmaster.
Yes, I did not expect that the relationship can be kept.
Conceptually +1 for your approach.
> > Ditching cmd.exe seems like a big hassle. So, on the flip side, I
> > tried to identify the postmaster PID using the shell's PID, and it
> > seem to work. The APIs used are avaiable from XP/2003 onwards.
According to 495ed0ef2, Windows 10 seems the minimal requirement for using
the postgres. So the approach seems OK.
Followings are my comment, but I can say only cosmetic ones because I do not have
windows machine which can run postgres.
1.
Forward declaration seems missing. In the pg_ctl.c, the static function seems to
be declared even if there is only one caller (c.f., GetPrivilegesToDelete).
2.
I think the argument should be pid_t.
3.
I'm not sure the return type of the function should be pid_t or not. According
to the document, DWORD corrresponds to the pid_t. In win32_port.h, the pid_t is
defiend as int (_MSC_VER seems to be defined when the VisualStduio is used). It
is harmless, but I perfer to match the interface between caller/callee. IIUC we
can add just a cast.
```
#ifdef _MSC_VER
typedef int pid_t;
#endif
```
Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2023-09-08 08:05:11 | Re: Build the docs if there are changes in docs and don't run other tasks if the changes are only in docs |
Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2023-09-08 07:52:42 | Re: CHECK Constraint Deferrable |