| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com, shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_ctl start may return 0 even if the postmaster has been already started on Windows |
| Date: | 2024-06-03 23:30:19 |
| Message-ID: | Zl5SC_kboY7i0AS8@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 01:34:46PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> This kind of change looks massively helpful to me. I don't know if it
> is exactly right or not, but it would have been a big help to me when
> writing my previous review, so +1 for some change of this general
> type.
During a live review of this patch last week, as part of the Advanced
Patch Workshop of pgconf.dev, it has been mentioned by Tom that we may
be able to simplify the check on pmstart if the detection of the
postmaster PID started by pg_ctl is more stable using the WIN32
internals that this patch relies on. I am not sure that this
suggestion is right, though, because we should still care about the
clock skew case as written in the surrounding comments? Even if
that's OK, I would assume that this should be an independent patch,
written on top of the proposed v6-0001.
Tom, could you comment about that? Perhaps my notes did not catch
what you meant.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-06-04 00:09:12 | Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-06-03 23:24:27 | Re: allow changing autovacuum_max_workers without restarting |