Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 18:19:08 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	Cygwin-Developers <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc:	Pgsql-Cygwin <pgsql-cygwin AT postgresql DOT org>
Subject:	Re: UNIX domain socket change breaks PostgreSQL (was Re: [CYGWIN] initdb fails)
Message-ID:	<20010418181908.A768@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	Cygwin-Developers <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>,
	Pgsql-Cygwin <pgsql-cygwin AT postgresql DOT org>
References:	<20010418164518 DOT B394 AT dothill DOT com> <20010418164828 DOT A30878 AT redhat DOT com> <20010418165809 DOT C394 AT dothill DOT com> <20010418172443 DOT A31159 AT redhat DOT com> <20010418175318 DOT E394 AT dothill DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<20010418175318.E394@dothill.com>; from Jason.Tishler@dothill.com on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 05:53:18PM -0400

On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 05:53:18PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
>Chris,
>
>On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 05:24:43PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:58:09PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
>> >On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:48:28PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >>Which part of the patch caused the problem?
>> >
>> >If I only back out the select part:
>> >
>> >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/winsup/cygwin/select.cc.diff?cvsroot=uberbaum&r1=1.35&r2=1.36
>> >
>> >then PostgreSQL is happy again.
>> 
>> I can't imagine how that could be.  That is a dummy socket.  It should
>> have no effect on anything but cygwin.
>
>By "cygwin" do you mean the DLL or any Cygwin process?  I wasn't explicit
>but both postmaster and psql are Cygwin processes.

I meant "internal to cygwin".  The SO_LINGER change only affects a socket
that is used by cygwin.  I think it is possible that reverting that change
might have slowed down select enough that it made things appear to work,
though.

>> I could believe that the change to AF_UNIX sockets would have an effect,
>> though.  I've backed out that patch since it was ill-advised.
>
>I will do a full cvs update, make clean, and make to verify that the
>problem is fixed in the current CVS.  I'll report back tomorrow.

Ok.  I would be interested in seeing if all of the changes that I made
affect PostgresSQL.

>> Could you try putting back the select change and backing out the net.cc
>> change?  I would be interested in seeing if that fixes things too.
>
>This fixes the problem too which implies that it should be fixed in the
>current CVS.

Good.  That makes sense.  I should have read the description of SO_LINGER
before I made the change for AF_UNIX sockets.  If I had, I never would have
considered it.

cgf

- Raw text -