On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 10:44:13PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> Given this, I propose we simply #ifdef out the SO_REUSEADDR on win32. > >> Anybody see a problem with this? > > > Is that true even if the backend crashes? > > It would take a postmaster crash to make this an issue, and those are > pretty doggone rare. Not that the question shouldn't be checked, but > we might decide to tolerate the problem if there is one ...
The closest I can get is a kill -9 on postmaster, and that does work. I can't start a new postmaster while the old backend is running - because of the shared memory detection stuff. But the second it's gone I can start a new one, so it doesn't have that wait-until-timeout behavior. Since that's expected behavior and there were no other complaints, I think I'll go ahead an put this one in later today. //Magnus ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
