> > > Given this, I propose we simply #ifdef out the SO_REUSEADDR on
win32.

I agree, that this is what we should do.

> > > (A fairly good reference to read up on the options is at
> > > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms740621.aspx
> >
> > Hmm ... if accurate, that page says in words barely longer than one
> > syllable that Microsoft entirely misunderstands the intended meaning

> > of SO_REUSEADDR.
>
> Yes, that's how I read it as well.
>
> > It looks like SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE might be a bit closer to the
> > standard semantics; should we use that instead on Windoze?
>
> I think you're reading something wrong. The way I read it,
> SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE gives us pretty much the same behavior we have on
Unix
> *without* SO_REUSEADDR. There's a paragraph specificallyi
> talking about the problem of restarting a server having to
> wait for a timeout when using this switch.

Yup, that switch is no good eighter.

Andreas

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster