Re: [HACKERS] Current Win32 port status - Mailing list pgsql-hackers-win32

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Current Win32 port status
Date
Msg-id 16255.1072108086@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Current Win32 port status  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Current Win32 port status
List pgsql-hackers-win32
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Using a socket or a pair of sockets is a very common practice in porting
> this sort of code from Unix to Windows. IIRC this is what Cygwin does
> under the hood.

> That would help to preserve the programming paradigms already in use in
> Postgres. If it proves to be a performance bottleneck then it could be
> revisited, but it seems unlikely.

AFAIR there is no place in Postgres where performance of a pipe
connection is critical.  Don't go out of your way to make it fast.

In fact, right offhand I only see two pipes used at all in the source
code: they are both in pgstat.c.  It's fairly likely that that could be
redesigned if it poses a problem on Windows.  (One of the pipes never
even transports any data; it's only used as a cheap-and-dirty means of
letting the statistics subprocess detect postmaster exit.)

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Current Win32 port status
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Current Win32 port status