Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Aidan Van Dyk
Subject Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O
Date
Msg-id 20100115202710.GU18076@oak.highrise.ca
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
* Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> [100115 15:20]:

> Ok. I'll look at splitting walreceiver code between the shared module
> and backend binary slightly differently. At first glance, it doesn't
> seem that hard after all, and will make the code more modular anyway.

Maybe an insane question, but why can postmaster just not "exec"
walreceiver?  I mean, because of windows, we already have that code
around, and then walreceiver could link directly to libpq and not have
to worry at all about linking all of postmaster backends to libpq...

But I do understand that's a radical change...

a.
-- 
Aidan Van Dyk                                             Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca                                       command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/                                   work like a slave.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: James William Pye
Date:
Subject: Re: plpython3
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Testing with concurrent sessions