Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Do people still use MinGW for any real work? Could we just drop
> walreceiver support from MinGW builds?
>
> Or maybe we should consider splitting walreceiver into two parts after
> all. Only the bare minimum that needs to access libpq would go into the
> shared object, and the rest would be linked with the backend as usual.
>
>
I use MinGW when doing Windows work (e.g. the threading piece in
parallel pg_restore). And I think it is generally desirable to be able
to build on Windows using an open source tool chain. I'd want a damn
good reason to abandon its use. And I don't like the idea of not
supporting walreceiver on it either. Please find another solution if
possible.
cheers
andrew
