> BTW, it also seems like a good idea to reorder the postmaster's
> startup operations so that the data-directory lockfile is checked
> before trying to acquire the port lockfile, instead of after. That
> way, in the common scenario where you're trying to start a second
> postmaster in the same directory + same port, it'd fail cleanly
> even if /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432.lock had disappeared.
Fine, sounds like reordering would eliminate the need for the socket lock
anyway, no ?
Andreas
