From: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Massa, Harald Armin" <chef(at)ghum(dot)de> |
Cc: | Ognjen Blagojevic <ognjen(at)etf(dot)bg(dot)ac(dot)rs>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Embedded Postgres |
Date: | 2010-04-22 16:45:24 |
Message-ID: | 4BD07D24.2020304@hogranch.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Massa, Harald Armin wrote:
>
> on unix, as you imply, it can be run with unix domain sockets,
> but not on Windows as they simply don't have this interface.
> and, it can be started as an application rather than as a
> system service, but it still runs as a separate process from
> your application(s) and in my book, thats not really embedded.
>
>
> within Windows there is the concept of a "named pipe". You could dig
> into the communication code of Postgres which puts data through the
> unix-socket, and write an "named pipe" communicator. PostgreSQL would
> still be running in its own process, but only accessable from within
> the application. Be aware: that is an idea for a solution; it is
> neither included nor projected for PostgreSQL.
I'm not sure more than one connection can be made to a named pipe, they
don't really work like sockets, so this would be a poor choice as even
an embedded database typically needs several connects from a
multithreaded application (plus maintenance connections such as autovacuum)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Morgan Taschuk | 2010-04-22 17:08:30 | PSQL segmentation fault after setting host |
Previous Message | Fernando Hevia | 2010-04-22 15:28:13 | Re: [GENERAL] Byte order mark added by (the envelope please...) pgAdmin3 !! |