Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?
Дата
Msg-id 9757.1179150587@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Ответы Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> If all we want to do is add a check that prevents two servers to start on
>>> the same port, we could do that trivially in a win32 specific way (since
>>> we'll never have unix sockets there). Just create an object in the global
>>> namespace named postgresql.interlock.<portnumber> or such a thing.

> Then I think it's worth adding, and I'd argue that as a low risk safety 
> measure we should allow it to sneak into 8.3. I'm assuming the code 
> involved will be quite small.

What happens if we just "#ifndef WIN32" the setsockopt(SO_REUSEADDR)
call?  I believe the reason that's in there is that some platforms will
reject bind() to a previously-used address for a TCP timeout delay after
a previous postmaster quit, but if that doesn't happen on Windows then
maybe all we need is to not set the option.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?
Следующее
От: Magnus Hagander
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?