> After looking into the issue of using PID file locks vs. flock/unlock, I have 
> come to the following conclusions:
> 
> 1.  It is generally agreed that a PID lock file should replace the current me-
>     thod of locking (fcntl based locking). (See the message thread with
>     '[HACKERS] flock patch breaks things here' in the subject).
> 
> 2.  The purpose of the lock file is to prevent multiple postmasters from run-
>     ning on the same port and database.
> 
> 3.  Two PID files will be necessary, one to prevent mulitple instances of post-
>     masters from running against the same data base, and one to prevent 
> multiple
>     instances from using the same port.
> 
> 4.  The database lock will be located in the DATA directory being locked.
> 
> 5.  The port lock will be kept in '/var/opt/pgsql/lock/'.

Yes, except lock file should be kept in /tmp.  I don't have
/var/opt/..., and I doubt others do either.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

• postmaster locking issues. at 1998-10-11 00:47:35 from Billy G. Allie

Responses

• Re: [HACKERS] postmaster locking issues. at 1998-10-11 08:47:31 from Peter T Mount

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 1998-10-11 01:45:50
	Subject: Re: [HACKERS] backslash in psql output
Previous:	From: Billy G. Allie	Date: 1998-10-11 00:47:35
	Subject: postmaster locking issues.