Re: possible to create CVS branch for proposed patch?

> On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 07:43:25PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Seems like something that should be done in a separate wrapper program.
> > Littering the backend with vast sections of platform-specific code that
> > provides optional functional is probably not going to fly, if I can assess
> > this group correctly.
>
> Our plan puts most of the work in a new NT/Cygwin-only version of
> backend/main.c. If we can use the existing signal() scheme to shut
> down PG, then we might not have to touch _anything_ else.
>
> What do you see in our plan that implies "vast sections of
> platform-specific code" "littering the backend"? If such changes are
> necessary, I want to know before we embark on this work.
>
> As far as this being "optional functional[ity]", I contend that
> PostgreSQL has no place as a ready-for-business tool on NT without
> this (or similar) work so that PG runs cleanly as a service, starting
> up and shutting down properly.

Agreed. We just want to minimize the affect on other areas of the code.
We have been pretty good at keeping platform-specific stuff isolated.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026