| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)s-itsolutions(dot)at>, Charlie Savage <cfis(at)savagexi(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED |
| Date: | 2008-10-15 16:28:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20081015162814.GE6012@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I have verified that it does indeed work. Underneath the hood it uses
> the native call LockFileEx() see win32io.c in Perl source. I suggest we
> should switch from this flaky use of Global namespace to having the
> postmaster acquire an explicit lock on a file in the datadir.
Does it work for all backends to grab a lock, so that if they continue
to live after postmaster has died, then the new postmaster cannot start?
I guess the postmaster could try-acquire an exclusive lock and all other
processes would acquire a shared lock.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-15 16:40:07 | Re: 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-10-15 16:23:18 | Re: autovacuum and reloptions |