Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
Date: 2012-09-03 13:56:05
Message-ID: 00ea01cd89db$dd3fee10$97bfca30$@kapila@huawei.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> 5. The fork/exec code is pretty primitive with respect to error handling.
> I didn't put much time into it since I'm afraid we may need to refactor it
entirely before a Windows equivalent can be > written. (And I need somebody
to write/test the Windows equivalent - any volunteers?)

I think part of the code for windows can be written by referring function
internal_forkexec(),
If you are okay, I can take up this. Please confirm.

> 8. PQcancel needs some work - it can't do what it does now, but it could
do kill(conn->postgres_pid, SIGINT) instead. > At least in Unix. I have no
idea what we'd do in Windows. This doesn't matter for pg_upgrade of course,
but it'd be
> important for manual use of this mode.

Can pgkill(int pid, int sig) API of PG be used to achieve the same on
Windows.

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2012-09-03 13:57:57 Re: pg_upgrade test mods for Windows/Mingw
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2012-09-03 13:52:22 Re: Yet another failure mode in pg_upgrade