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

Re: postmaster.pid

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "Barry Lind" <blind(at)xythos(dot)com>,<pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Max Dunn" <mdunn(at)xythos(dot)com>
Subject: Re: postmaster.pid
Date: 2004-08-24 14:55:20
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E41A7867@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net] 
> Sent: 24 August 2004 15:06
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Barry Lind; pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org; Max Dunn
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] postmaster.pid
> 
> 
> 
> I think we're on the wrong track here. If there is a pid file 
> then the postmaster will try to see if the process is running 
> by calling
> kill(pid,0) - see backend/utils/init/miscinit.c.
> 
> However, on Windows we simulate kill(), and always return 
> EINVAL if the signal <= 0 (see port/kill.c). ISTM the correct 
> solution would be to implement the effect of kill(pid,0) in 
> port/kill.c, presumably by a call to some native Windows 
> function that gives you the process info for a given pid.

Hi Andrew,

I'm glad you spotted that - I was just about to submit a patch that used
kill(pid, 0)!! My code is now submitted in a slightly different form
which will hopefully help sort this problem, however I have an hour or
so now so I'll take a quick look at the kill() issue.

Regards, Dave.

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Shelby CainDate: 2004-08-24 15:12:12
Subject: Re: Postgresql 8.0 beta 1 - strange cpu usage statistics and slow vacuuming
Previous:From: Tony and Bryn ReinaDate: 2004-08-24 14:54:19
Subject: Re: Compiling 8.0beta on mingw with openssl support

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