Re: Re: Sure enough, the lock file is gone

Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> > How does netstat find out?

> netstat burrows around in kernel datastructures, is how.

> I don't see invoking netstat as a solution anyway. For one thing,
> it's drastically nonstandard; even if available, it varies in parameters

I said as much as it wasn't portable. But I asked also if a portable
way was available -- I do not currently know that answer to that, but I
will be investigating such.

> (Please recall that one of the motivations
> for the UUNET patch was to allow multiple postmasters running with the
> same port number in different subdirectories. Hmm, I wonder how netstat
> shows socketfiles that are in chroot'd subtrees, or outside your own
> chroot ...)

When were these 'UUNET' patches issued? I like the idea, but just
curious. I don't recall them, in fact -- nor do I recall the
discussion. I'll look it up in the archives later. Going to bed after a
night of RPM'ing.

As to the chroot vs netstat question, that is a good one. I have no
chroot's in effect, so I can't test that one.

So, if multiple postmasters are running on the same port in different
dirs, it would be somewhat difficult to determine which should be the
'default' in the list. However, one would think an admin who has set up
a multiple postmaster system of that sort wouldn't be relying on a
default anyway -- but that is a dangerous assumption.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11