Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
Date
Msg-id 00ea01cd89db$dd3fee10$97bfca30$@kapila@huawei.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> 5. The fork/exec code is pretty primitive with respect to error handling.
> I didn't put much time into it since I'm afraid we may need to refactor it
entirely before a Windows equivalent can be > written.  (And I need somebody
to write/test the Windows equivalent - any volunteers?)


I think part of the code for windows can be written by referring function
internal_forkexec(), 
If you are okay, I can take up this. Please confirm.



> 8. PQcancel needs some work - it can't do what it does now, but it could
do kill(conn->postgres_pid, SIGINT) instead.  > At least in Unix.  I have no
idea what we'd do in Windows.  This doesn't matter for pg_upgrade of course,
but it'd be 
> important for manual use of this mode.

Can pgkill(int pid, int sig) API of PG be used to achieve the same on
Windows.


With Regards,
Amit Kapila.





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Yet another failure mode in pg_upgrade
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade test mods for Windows/Mingw