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

Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?
Date: 2007-06-04 07:37:09
Message-ID: 20070604073709.GA21240@svr2.hagander.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 11:29:33PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > Given this, I propose we simply #ifdef out the SO_REUSEADDR on win32.
> > Anybody see a problem with this?
> 
> > (A fairly good reference to read up on the options is at
> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms740621.aspx
> 
> Hmm ... if accurate, that page says in words barely longer than one
> syllable that Microsoft entirely misunderstands the intended meaning
> of SO_REUSEADDR.

Yes, that's how I read it as well.


> It looks like SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE might be a bit closer to the standard
> semantics; should we use that instead on Windoze?

I think you're reading something wrong. The way I read it,
SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE gives us pretty much the same behavior we have on Unix
*without* SO_REUSEADDR. There's a paragraph specificallyi talking about the
problem of restarting a server having to wait for a timeout when using this
switch.

//Magnus


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2007-06-04 07:49:47
Subject: Re: Attempt to re-archive existing WAL logsafterrestoringfrom backup
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-06-04 07:30:07
Subject: So, why isn't *every* buildfarm member failing ecpg right now?

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