Re: fcntl(SETLK) [was Re: 2nd update on TOAST]

From: Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL HACKERS <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: fcntl(SETLK) [was Re: 2nd update on TOAST]
Date: 2000-07-08 13:28:00
Message-ID: 20000708062800.F25571@fw.wintelcom.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> [000708 06:02] wrote:
> > > my $pgsocket = "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432";
> > >
> > > # try to connect to the postmaster
> > > socket(SOCK, PF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0)
> > > or die "unable to create unix domain socket: $!";
> > >
> > > connect(SOCK, sockaddr_un($pgsocket))
> > > and errexit("postmaster is running you must shut it down");
> > >
> > > oh yeah... :)
> > >
> > > -Alfred
> >
> > I don't get this. Isn't there a race condition here?
>
> That's a good point. I don't think so because the socket will only
> create for one user. Basically, we don't need something bulletproof
> here. We just need something to prevent admins from accidentally
> starting two postmasters on the same port.

Actually I just remebered the issue here, if one wants to start
postmaster on an alternate port there will be no conflict and
all hell may break loose.

-Alfred

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-07-08 13:40:07 Re: fcntl(SETLK) [was Re: 2nd update on TOAST]
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-07-08 13:14:36 Re: postgres TODO