Re: WIN32 native ... lets start?!? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joerg Hessdoerfer
Subject Re: WIN32 native ... lets start?!?
Date
Msg-id 200205162036.g4GKakJp029062@smtp.netcologne.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIN32 native ... lets start?!?  ("Magnus Naeslund(f)" <mag@fbab.net>)
Responses Re: WIN32 native ... lets start?!?  ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thursday 16 May 2002 22:10, you wrote:
[...]
>
> What is the biggest problem here?
> The Shmem/IPC stuff, or the fork() stuff?
> I'm think that we could do a fork() implementation in usermode by copying
> the memory allocations. How fast that would be regarding the context
> switches, i don't know, but i'm willing to experiment some to see how
> feesible this is...
>
> Anyone tried this before?
>
> Magnus
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

The problem is not the fork() call itself, this has been done (MinGW and 
cygwin I know of, possibly others) but the speed of fork() on windows, it's 
creepingly slow (due to usermode copy, I assume ;-).

IPC needs to be done, I'm just about to start...

Greetings,Joerg
-- 
Leading SW developer  - S.E.A GmbH
Mail: joerg.hessdoerfer@sea-gmbh.com
WWW:  http://www.sea-gmbh.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Alan Dorman
Date:
Subject: Re: Queries using rules show no rows modified?
Next
From: "Nigel J. Andrews"
Date:
Subject: libpgtcl - backend version information patch