Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pgwin32_open returning EINVAL

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgwin32_open returning EINVAL
Date: 2007-12-16 03:31:38
Message-ID: 18938.1197775898@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> Interesting. Maybe forever is going a bit too far, but retrying for <n>
>> seconds or so.

> I think looping forever is the right thing. Having a fixed timeout just means
> Postgres will break sometimes instead of all the time. And it introduces
> non-deterministic behaviour too.

Looping forever would be considered broken by a very large fraction of
the community.

IIRC we have a 30-second timeout in rename() for Windows, and that seems
to be working well enough, so I'd be inclined to copy the behavior for
this case.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2007-12-16 03:55:51
Subject: Re: stored procedures to webservices
Previous:From: ivo nascimentoDate: 2007-12-16 02:49:59
Subject: stored procedures to webservices

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group