Re: postmaster.pid - Mailing list pgsql-hackers-win32

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: postmaster.pid
Date
Msg-id 4340.1093363174@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: postmaster.pid  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: postmaster.pid
List pgsql-hackers-win32
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> I think we're on the wrong track here. If there is a pid file then the
> postmaster will try to see if the process is running by calling
> kill(pid,0) - see backend/utils/init/miscinit.c.

> However, on Windows we simulate kill(), and always return EINVAL if the
> signal <= 0 (see port/kill.c).

That's clearly broken.  Should you not send the zero signal the same way
as other signals, and just let the recipient ignore it?  (This assumes
that the pre-existing postmaster is accessible to a would-be new
postmaster's kill ... is that true?)

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date:

Previous
From: "Dave Page"
Date:
Subject: Re: postmaster.pid
Next
From: "Magnus Hagander"
Date:
Subject: Re: postmaster.pid