On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 09:34:05AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 09:02:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >>Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> >>
> >>>If all we want to do is add a check that prevents two servers to start on
> >>>the same port, we could do that trivially in a win32 specific way (since
> >>>we'll never have unix sockets there). Just create an object in the global
> >>>namespace named postgresql.interlock.<portnumber> or such a thing.
> >>>
> >>Does it go away automatically on postmaster crash?
> >>
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Then I think it's worth adding, and I'd argue that as a low risk safety
> measure we should allow it to sneak into 8.3. I'm assuming the code
> involved will be quite small.
Yes, see attached.
BTW, did you mean 8.2? One typical case where this could happen is in an
upgrade scenario, I think...
//Magnus
