Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
Date
Msg-id 200312150328.hBF3Sqk28631@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> [moved to hackers / win32]
>
> Claudio Natoli wrote:
>
> >Or do people have strong leanings towards "fix as you go along"? Just feels
> >like that way could see us getting bogged down making things "perfect"
> >instead of advancing the port...
> >
> >
> >
>
> w.r.t. Win32, I think the way to proceed is (in this order):
> . make it work
> . make it elegant
> . make it fast
>
> BTW, I agree with Bruce, you're doing excellent stuff. Now for the fun
> part (signals).

Actually, no.  I thought fork/exec would be a real mess (as did Tom),
but Claudio has done an excellent job of producing a minimal patch.  The
work isn't done yet, but this small patch has taken us much closer, so I
assume signals will be even easier.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Resurrecting pg_upgrade