Michael Paesold wrote:
> Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Mind you NFS users are currently entirely unprotected from someone
>>starting a postmaster on a different NFS client using the same data
>>directory right now, which file locking would prevent. So there is
>>some win for NFS users as
Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > $ man flock
> > No manual entry for flock.
> > $
> >
> > HPUX has generally taken the position of adopting both BSD and SysV
> > features, so if it doesn't exist here, it's not portable to older
> > Unixen ...
>
> If only local loc
Tom Lane writes:
> $ man flock
> No manual entry for flock.
> $
>
> HPUX has generally taken the position of adopting both BSD and SysV
> features, so if it doesn't exist here, it's not portable to older
> Unixen ...
If only local locking is at issue then finding any one of fcntl()
locking, fl
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Have people considered flock (advisory locking) on the postmaster.pid
> file for backend detection?
$ man flock
No manual entry for flock.
$
HPUX has generally taken the position of adopting both BSD and SysV
features, so if it doesn't exist here, it's
Have people considered flock (advisory locking) on the postmaster.pid
file for backend detection? It has a nonblocking option. Don't most
OS's support it?
I can't understand why we can't get an easier solution to postmaster
detection than shared memory.
--
Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm certainly no fan of NFS locking, but if someone trusts their NFS
> client and server implementations enough to put their data on, they
> might as well trust it to get a single lock file for startup right
> too. IMHO. Your mileage may vary.
Well, my l
Tom Lane wrote:
> Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is there some reason that file locking is not acceptable? Is there
> > any platform or filesystem supported for use with PostgreSQL which
> > doesn't have working exclusive file locking?
>
> How would we know? We have never tried to
Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there some reason that file locking is not acceptable? Is there
> any platform or filesystem supported for use with PostgreSQL which
> doesn't have working exclusive file locking?
How would we know? We have never tried to use such a feature.
For sure
Tom Lane wrote:
[ discussion of new startup interlock ]
> This is not quite ready for prime time yet, because it's not very
> bulletproof against the scenario where two would-be postmasters are
> starting concurrently.
A solution to this is to require would-be postmasters to obtain an
exclusiv
I have the beginnings of an idea about improving our interlock logic
for postmaster startup. The existing method is pretty good, but we
have had multiple reports that it can fail during system boot if the
old postmaster wasn't given a chance to shut down cleanly: there's
a fair-sized chance that
10 matches
Mail list logo
