Eric Haszlakiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 12:48:13PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> That's already documented not to work, and not for any hidden
>> implementation reason: you'd have a conflict on the Unix-domain socket
>> name.
> er.. but I didn't get any kind of error about a conflict on a unix domain
> socket, I got an error about shmget. I don't even think it's possible
> to have a conflict like that since the two servers were running in
> different chroot directories.
Well, different chroot would do it, but you didn't mention that ;-)
Anyway, I still think that the proposed documentation patches are wrong,
because the code ought to work as long as you don't have a direct
conflict on TCP or Unix sockets. It's true that the port number is used
as a seed for picking shmem keys, but it should try the next key if it
hits an already-in-use shmem segment. Can you poke at it a bit more
closely and see what's happening? What platform is this, anyway?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
