Magnus Hagander wrote:
> This would amount to fairly major surgery for pg_standby on Win32. Is
> that something we'd want to backpatch, or do we want to backpatch just
> the removal of the signal() calls which would amount to not supporting
> signals in pg_standby on win32?
I think we should just remove the signals support for win32. The trigger
file method still works, and the signal method has always been a bit
iffy (it doesn't work when pg_standby isn't running, for example, which
happens between processing of each WAL file, because there's no process
to signal).
Is pg_standby killed correctly when postmaster dies?
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
