Re: PG+Cygwin Production Experience (was RE: Path to PostgreSQL porta biliy)

From: "Cyril VELTER" <cyril(dot)velter(at)libertysurf(dot)fr>
To: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG+Cygwin Production Experience (was RE: Path to PostgreSQL porta biliy)
Date: 2002-05-09 14:27:37
Message-ID: 006101c1f765$ae6b7500$6901a8c0@cvfixe
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>From: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> "Henshall, Stuart - WCP" <SHenshall(at)westcountrypublications(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > Cygwin is not the only additon needed, cygipc will also be needed (GPL)
> > (see:
http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/cygipc/index.html )
>
> Good point, but is this a requirement that we could get rid of, now that
> we have the SysV IPC stuff somewhat isolated? AFAICT cygipc provides
> the SysV IPC API (shmget, semget, etc) --- but if there are usable
> equivalents in the basic Cygwin environment, we could probably use them
> now.
>
> Considering how often we see the forgot-to-start-cygipc mistake,
> removing this requirement would be a clear win.
>
> regards, tom lane

In my experience, cygipc is the most tricky part in a postgresql/cygwin
install (mainly because because of access rights problem). Using native call
for sem / shm will be a good step forward (and the API change might make
this quite easy). I've also never been able to start two postmaster instance
on the same box. Doing so is messing shared memory leading to both
postmaster crashing.

cyril

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-05-09 14:43:30 Re: Queries using rules show no rows modified?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-05-09 14:25:43 Re: How much work is a native Windows application?