Re: [HACKERS] postmaster locking issues.
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] postmaster locking issues. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 199810110135.VAA01425@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | postmaster locking issues. ("Billy G. Allie" <Bill.Allie@mug.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] postmaster locking issues.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> After looking into the issue of using PID file locks vs. flock/unlock, I have > come to the following conclusions: > > 1. It is generally agreed that a PID lock file should replace the current me- > thod of locking (fcntl based locking). (See the message thread with > '[HACKERS] flock patch breaks things here' in the subject). > > 2. The purpose of the lock file is to prevent multiple postmasters from run- > ning on the same port and database. > > 3. Two PID files will be necessary, one to prevent mulitple instances of post- > masters from running against the same data base, and one to prevent > multiple > instances from using the same port. > > 4. The database lock will be located in the DATA directory being locked. > > 5. The port lock will be kept in '/var/opt/pgsql/lock/'. Yes, except lock file should be kept in /tmp. I don't have /var/opt/..., and I doubt others do either. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: