On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 08:50:54AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Uh ... so the lock-file stuff is completely broken on Windows?
> Not so much broken as commented out ... on looking at the code, it's
> blindingly obvious that we don't even try to create a socket lock file
> if not HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS.  Sigh.
> There is a related risk even on Unix machines: two postmasters can be
> started on the same port number if they have different settings of
> unix_socket_directory, and then it's indeterminate which one you will
> contact if you connect to the TCP port.  I seem to recall that we
> discussed this several years ago, and didn't really find a satisfactory
> way of interlocking the TCP port per se.

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.

Worth doing?


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Reply via email to