| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Why doesn't src/backend/port/win32/socket.c implement bind()? |
| Date: | 2016-04-13 13:33:14 |
| Message-ID: | 19658.1460554394@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> If there's other stuff using high ports on a particular buildfarm machine,
>> you'd expect occasional random test failures due to this. The observed
>> fact that some buildfarm critters are much more prone to this type of
>> failure than others is well explained by this hypothesis.
> Each test run uses its own custom unix_socket_directories, PGHOST is
> enforced to use it, and all the port tests go through that as well.
By that argument, we don't need the free-port-searching code on Unix at
all. But this discussion is mostly about Windows machines.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Abhijit Menon-Sen | 2016-04-13 13:36:48 | Re: Pglogical questions and problems |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-04-13 12:50:24 | Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW |