From: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers-win32" <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: running as a service? |
Date: | 2004-05-15 12:46:55 |
Message-ID: | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE17168B@algol.sollentuna.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
>> What are the current plans regarding running PG as a
>service? A wrapper,
>> or integrated code? If a wrapper, will it be put in the
>core, or done as
>> something like a contrib or pgfoundry project?
>
>IF a wrapper, should be pgfoundry ... *but*, wouldn't integratd by
>cleaner?
IF it should go to pgfoundry in that case, I'd say it *has* to be
integrated :-)
*Everybody* on win32 will expect this. No matter if they download source
or binaries or MSI installer. If we don't provide it in the main
install, people will see that as a major feature lacking that has to be
fixed by an external package.
As for which - the current code (submitted by Claudio) does an "extra
fork/exec" on the postmaster, basically making the postmaster a wrapper
for itself (correct me if I remember incorrectly here Claudio - seems
the archives.postgresql.org server is down ATM, and I can't find the
patch locally). If so, I think it would actualliy be slightly cleaner to
have it in a separate binary (that still does all the signal translation
we need, of course).
But as I think I've said before, I think the two ways are fairly equal
overall. But it *has* to go in the main distro.
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-05-15 13:36:55 | Re: running as a service? |
Previous Message | Claudio Natoli | 2004-05-15 10:26:45 | Re: running as a service? |