Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> [ thinks... ] Maybe we could have the postmaster generate a random
> number at start and include that in both the postmaster.ports file
> and its pg_ping responses. That would have a substantially lower
> collision probability than PID, if the number generation process
> were well designed; and it wouldn't risk exposing anything sensitive
> in the ping response.
Unless two postmasters could open the same server socket within a
microsecond of one another, a timestamp value captured on opening the
server socket seems even better than a random number. Well, I guess
if someone subverted the clock it could mislead, but is that really
more likely to cause a false match than a random number?
-Kevin