On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 05:53:18PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
>Chris,
>
>On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 05:24:43PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:58:09PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
>> >On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:48:28PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >>Which part of the patch caused the problem?
>> >
>> >If I only back out the select part:
>> >
>> >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/winsup/cygwin/select.cc.diff?cvsroot=uberbaum&r1=1.35&r2=1.36
>> >
>> >then PostgreSQL is happy again.
>>
>> I can't imagine how that could be. That is a dummy socket. It should
>> have no effect on anything but cygwin.
>
>By "cygwin" do you mean the DLL or any Cygwin process? I wasn't explicit
>but both postmaster and psql are Cygwin processes.
I meant "internal to cygwin". The SO_LINGER change only affects a socket
that is used by cygwin. I think it is possible that reverting that change
might have slowed down select enough that it made things appear to work,
though.
>> I could believe that the change to AF_UNIX sockets would have an effect,
>> though. I've backed out that patch since it was ill-advised.
>
>I will do a full cvs update, make clean, and make to verify that the
>problem is fixed in the current CVS. I'll report back tomorrow.
Ok. I would be interested in seeing if all of the changes that I made
affect PostgresSQL.
>> Could you try putting back the select change and backing out the net.cc
>> change? I would be interested in seeing if that fixes things too.
>
>This fixes the problem too which implies that it should be fixed in the
>current CVS.
Good. That makes sense. I should have read the description of SO_LINGER
before I made the change for AF_UNIX sockets. If I had, I never would have
considered it.
cgf
