Re: Roadmap for a Win32 port - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Mark kirkwood |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Roadmap for a Win32 port |
Date | |
Msg-id | 1023262733.1314.7.camel@spikey.slithery.org Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Roadmap for a Win32 port (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Responses |
Re: Roadmap for a Win32 port
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 16:33, Bruce Momjian wrote: > OK, I think I am now caught up on the Win32/cygwin discussion, and would > like to make some remarks. > > First, are we doing enough to support the Win32 platform? I think the > answer is clearly "no". There are 3-5 groups/companies working on Win32 > ports of PostgreSQL. We always said there would not be PostgreSQL forks > if we were doing our job to meet user needs. Well, obviously, a number > of groups see a need for a better Win32 port and we aren't meeting that > need, so they are. I believe this is one of the few cases where groups > are going out on their own because we are falling behind. > > So, there is no question in my mind we need to do more to encourage > Win32 ports. Now, on to the details. > > INSTALLER > --------- > > We clearly need an installer that is zero-hassle for users. We need to > decide on a direction for this. > > GUI > --- > > We need a slick GUI. pgadmin2 seems to be everyone's favorite, with > pgaccess on Win32 also an option. What else do we need here? > > BINARY > ------ > > This is the big daddy. It is broken down into several sections: > > FORK() > > How do we handle fork()? Do we use the cygwin method that copies the > whole data segment, or put the global data in shared memory and copy > that small part manually after we create a new process? > > THREADING > > Related to fork(), do we implement an optionally threaded postmaster, > which eliminates CreateProcess() entirely? I don't think we will have > superior performance on Win32 without it. (This would greatly help > Solaris as well.) > > IPC > > We can use Cygwin, MinGW, Apache, or our own code for this. Are there > other options? > > ENVIRONMENT > > Lots of our code requires a unix shell and utilities. Will we continue > using cygwin for this? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > As a roadmap, it would be good to get consensus on as many of these > items as possible so people can start working in these areas. We can > keep a web page of decisions we have made to help rally developers to > the project. > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html > Is it worth looking at how the mysql crowd did their win32 port - (or is that intrinsically a _bad_thing_ to do..) ? (I am guessing that is why their sources requires c++ ....) regards Mark
pgsql-hackers by date: