Re: two servers on the same port - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: two servers on the same port
Date
Msg-id 25023.1224349435@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: two servers on the same port  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> That's already documented not to work, and not for any hidden
>> implementation reason: you'd have a conflict on the Unix-domain socket
>> name.

> unless you use a different socket directory.

Hmm ... but the OP didn't mention any such thing.  In any case I think
he's misdiagnosed his problem, because the shmem code *should* ignore
pre-existing shmem segments that are already in use --- see the loop in
PGSharedMemoryCreate.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: two servers on the same port
Next
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: PGDay.it collation discussion notes