Re: 9.2 pg_upgrade regression tests on WIndows - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: 9.2 pg_upgrade regression tests on WIndows
Date
Msg-id 50461B78.4050701@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 9.2 pg_upgrade regression tests on WIndows  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 09/04/2012 09:47 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Sep  3, 2012 at 12:44:09PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> The attached very small patch allows pg_upgrade's "make check" to
>> succeed on REL9_2_STABLE on my Mingw system.
>>
>> However, I consider the issue I mentioned earlier regarding use of
>> forward slashes in the argument to rmdir to be a significant
>> blocker, so I'm going to go and fix that and then pull this all
>> together.
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> andrew
>> diff --git a/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c b/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c
>> index 6f993df..57ca1df 100644
>> --- a/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c
>> +++ b/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c
>> @@ -91,10 +91,12 @@ exec_prog(bool throw_error, bool is_priv, const char *log_file,
>>       else
>>           retval = 0;
>>   
>> +#ifndef WIN32
>>       if ((log = fopen_priv(log_file, "a+")) == NULL)
>>           pg_log(PG_FATAL, "cannot write to log file %s\n", log_file);
>>       fprintf(log, "\n\n");
>>       fclose(log);
>> +#endif
>>   
>>       return retval;
>>   }
> I am confused by this fix.  If pg_ctl was keeping that log file open,
> wouldn't the log write fail when pg_dump or psql was run later?  I am
> trying to understand how a later commands would not also trigger an
> error.  Is it a timing thing?  If that is it, I would like to know and
> have that documented.

Oh, hmm. I thought it was the postmaster holding the log, but now I see 
that we are giving it a different log file. Maybe it is a timing thing. 
I'll experiment and see if a sleep cures the problem.


...


Nope, still getting this after a sleep(5):
   cannot write to log file pg_upgrade_server_start.log   Failure, exiting

...


[try some more] Nope, even in a loop lasting 60s I still got this.


So I'm a bit confused too. Seeing if I can narrow it down using ProcMon ...


cheers

andrew





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Wiki link for max_connections? (Fwd: Re: [ADMIN] PostgreSQL oom_adj postmaster process to -17)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade del/rmdir path fix