On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > By definition, the address range we're trying to reuse worked successfully > in the postmaster process. I don't see how forcing a specific address > could do anything but create an additional risk of postmaster startup > failure.
If the postmaster picked an address where other things are unlikely to get loaded, then that would increase the chances of child processes finding it available, wouldn't it? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
