Re: pg_regress starting postmaster

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_regress starting postmaster
Date: 2006-09-24 16:17:08
Message-ID: 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0FBDB@algol.sollentuna.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > subject says it all. pg_regress starts "postmaster" (pg_regress.c,
> > line 1515). Shouldn't this be "postgres" these days?
>
> No. We're a very long way away from considering removing the
> postmaster symlink, so it doesn't matter.

Well, per previous discussion, we're removing postmaster.exe from the
win32 installer, because it bloats the distribution wihtout any gain
(remember - windows doesn't have symlinks, so we need a complete copy of
a file that's 4Mb or so). So it would matter there.

> > Actually, a second thought given that I was just bitten by the
> > run-tests-as-admin-doesn't-work - should we use pg_ctl to start it?
> No, not unless you'd like to break pg_regress's ability to
> kill the postmaster --- we need the postmaster to be the
> direct child process.

D'oh, forgot about that. Nevermind about that part then.

//Magnus

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-09-24 16:19:26 Re: AllocFile debug code
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2006-09-24 16:16:54 Re: Buildfarm alarms