> >> o fix shared memory on Win2k terminal server
> >> We might be able to just mark this as not supported.
> >I have attached a patch that I think fixes this. The problem I saw
> >and fixed is, that the shmem created in a terminal services client is not
> >visible to the console (or services.msc).
> Does this actually fix the problem for you?
> Because, as I have previously posted I think, it does *not* solve the
> problem on any of my test machines. I still get the shmget() error
> message when running from a TS session.
I think you are having another problem.
I can create it here (with or without the patch). I am running
W2000 5.00.2195 SP4. Maybe you are having a permissions problem?
I am using a user with near Administrator privs.
> Also, I don't really see how the visibility of the shmem segment
If it really does not matter, please don't apply my patch Bruce.
(still do the rename though please)
> We can't *create* the first instance of it, which should not
> affect this at all. And if we passed that, all backends are still
> execute in the same session, so there is no effect on it.
Yes it only matters if postmaster is started/trying to start from different
TS Sessions. I think we need to determine global existance of the shm segment
to get rid of old processes/segments.
> services.msc only interacts with the SCM, it has nothing at all to do
> with shmem.
I meant if "run as a service", which is the same TS session as the console.
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Thomas Swan||Date: 2004-10-19 15:04:54|
|Subject: Re: Hypothetical Indexes|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2004-10-19 13:50:37|
|Subject: Command-line parsing in pg_ctl is not portable|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2004-10-19 15:44:05|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] strange result from contrib/seg regression on windows|
|Previous:||From: Devrim GUNDUZ||Date: 2004-10-19 13:48:11|
|Subject: Updated Turkish translations|