Re: Improving backend startup interlock
От | Giles Lean |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Improving backend startup interlock |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 15987.1033268333@nemeton.com.au обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Improving backend startup interlock (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Improving backend startup interlock
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Giles Lean <giles@nemeton.com.au> writes: > > Is there some reason that file locking is not acceptable? Is there > > any platform or filesystem supported for use with PostgreSQL which > > doesn't have working exclusive file locking? > > How would we know? We have never tried to use such a feature. I asked because I've not been following this project long enough to know if it had been tried and rejected previously. Newcomers being prone to making silly suggestions and all that. :-) > For sure I would not trust it on an NFS filesystem. (Although we > disparage running an NFS-mounted database, people do it anyway.) <scratches head> I can't work out if that's an objection or not. I'm certainly no fan of NFS locking, but if someone trusts their NFS client and server implementations enough to put their data on, they might as well trust it to get a single lock file for startup right too. IMHO. Your mileage may vary. Regards, Giles
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: