Re: semaphore usage "port based"?
От | Marc G. Fournier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: semaphore usage "port based"? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20060403012403.T947@ganymede.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: semaphore usage "port based"? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks all ... have moved this to just the freebsd-stable list, since I don't imagine most here are interested in FreeBSD :( On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Andrew Thompson wrote: > On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 11:41:01PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 12:30:58AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>> 'k, but how do I fix kill so that it has the proper behaviour if SysV is >>> enabled? >> >> Check the source, perhaps there's already a way. If not, talk to >> whoever made the change. >> >>> Maybe a mount option for procfs that allows for pre-5.x >>> behaviour? >> >> procfs has nothing to do with this though. >> >>> I'm not the first one to point out that this is a problem, just >>> the first to follow it through to the cause ;( And I believe there is >>> more then just PostgreSQL that is affected by shared memory (ie. apache2 >>> needs SysV IPC enabled, so anyone doing that in a jail has it enabled >>> also) ... >> >> Also note that SysV IPC is not the problem here, it's the change in >> the behaviour of kill() that is causing postgresql to become confused. >> That's what you should investigate. > > The ESRCH error is being returned from prison_check(), that would be a > good starting place. > > > Andrew > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: