> 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
> 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
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.|