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

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
Date: 2012-11-12 15:01:39
Message-ID: CAHyXU0ztwZ14Anyw=tEEZdN=JVJmbG1a9ceEpqj+vDY-DdO2Yw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Amit kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 7:07 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Monday, September 10, 2012 8:20 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Sunday, September 09, 2012 1:37 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Friday, September 07, 2012 11:19 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> writes:
>>>>> Would socketpair(2) be simpler?
>
>
>
>>>>>I've not done anything yet about the potential security issues
>>>>>associated with untrusted libpq connection strings. I think this
>>>>is still at the proof-of-concept stage; in particular, it's probably
>>>> time to see if we can make it work on Windows before we worry more
>>>>about that.
>
>>> I have started working on this patch to make it work on Windows. The 3
> main things to make it work are:
>
>>The patch which contains Windows implementation as well is attached with this mail. It contains changes related to following
>>1. waitpid
>>2. socketpair
>>3. fork-exec
>
>>The following is still left:
>> 1. Error handling in all paths
>
> The modified version 2 contains error handling in all paths.

I didn't see that this patch was added to a commitfest -- should it
have been? I very much like Tom's proposed starting point for this
feature as a replacement for --single. Hate to see this die on the
vine. Would some testing on windows be what's needed to get the ball
rolling?

merlin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-11-12 15:19:09 Re: Inadequate thought about buffer locking during hot standby replay
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2012-11-12 15:00:05 Re: Enabling Checksums