Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Windows service is not starting so there’s message in log: FATAL: "could not create shared memory segment “Global/PostgreSQL.851401618”: Permission denied”

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dmitry Vasilyev <d(dot)vasilyev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Windows service is not starting so there’s message in log: FATAL: "could not create shared memory segment “Global/PostgreSQL.851401618”: Permission denied”
Date: 2016-05-16 19:16:07
Message-ID: CAA4eK1La8-KdvpOan3nAYDhijyk_=wjSRT3fTq=Qzk1fyEf8WA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> > Sounds sensible, but if we want to that route, shall we have some
mechanism
> > such that if retrying it for 10 times (10 is somewhat arbitrary, but we
> > retry 10 times in PGSharedMemoryCreate, so may be there is some
consistency)
> > doesn't give us unique name and we are getting EACCES error, then just
throw
> > the error instead of more retries. This is to ensure that if the API is
> > returning EACCES due to reason other than duplicate handle, then we
won't
> > retry indefinitely.
>
> The logic in win32_shmem.c relies on the fact that a segment will be
> recycled, and the retry is here because it may take time at OS level.
> On top of that it relies on the segment names being unique across
> systems. So it seems to me that it is not worth the complication to
> duplicate that logic in the dsm implementation.

If we don't do retry for fixed number of times, then how will we handle the
case if EACCES is due to the reason other than duplicate handle?

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Piotr Stefaniak 2016-05-16 19:40:28 A couple of cosmetic changes around shared memory code
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2016-05-16 17:59:04 Re: 10.0