On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 09:49:47AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.

I think that at least used to happen on Windows in earlier versions.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to