On Tue, 7 May 2002, mlw wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > And no, I don't want to undo those changes. Especially not if the
> > only reason for it is to not have to use Cygwin on Windows. Most
> > of these changes made the startup code substantially simpler,
> > faster, and more reliable.
>
> Then I think the notion of a pure Windows version is dead in the water.
> Writing a fork()-like API for Windows is, of course, doable as evidenced
> by cygwin, and from a general theory seems like a pretty straight
> forward thing to do (with a few low level tricks of course) but the
> details are pretty scary.
How is Apache doing this? I believe they do allow the pre-forked model to
work, so how are they getting around those limitations?
