Re: PGSTAT: bind(2): Can't assign requested address

From: "Bjoern A(dot) Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists(at)lists(dot)zabbadoz(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PGSTAT: bind(2): Can't assign requested address
Date: 2006-04-05 16:49:59
Message-ID: 20060405162701.W76259@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists(at)lists(dot)zabbadoz(dot)net> writes:
>> A datagram socket (SOCK_DGRAM) is called "UDP Socket" when it
>> assumes IP (AF_INET) or IPv6 (AF_INET6) as it's underlying
>> protocol.
>> But you can always use SOCK_DGRAM over AF_LOCAL.
>
> I'm unconvinced that that has the same semantics on all platforms.
> Unix pipes traditionally have different behavior with respect to
> blocking, partial message send, etc.

Are you worried about posix local sockets in general? Or are you
worried about doing sock_dgram over posix local sockets?

just some more thoughts...

- libpq uses posix local sockets (even streaming) as default if
available and no hostname is given. I'd be more worried about
my data...

- posix local sockets have been around for ages and I'd rather
rely on posix local sockets than any IPv6 protocol implementation.

- it's the same API on top of them

- it's posix these days

- it could be configurable/optional

--
Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Paolo Lopez 2006-04-05 21:00:09 Problema Order By en PosgreSQL 8.1
Previous Message Brock Peabody 2006-04-05 16:06:07 Re: BUG #2371: database crashes with semctl failed error