Re: fork/exec patch - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Claudio Natoli
Subject Re: fork/exec patch
Date
Msg-id A02DEC4D1073D611BAE8525405FCCE2B028098@harris.memetrics.local
Whole thread Raw
In response to fork/exec patch  (Claudio Natoli <claudio.natoli@memetrics.com>)
Responses Re: fork/exec patch  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
[Thought I replied to this already]

> I am now thinking we have to remove pgsql/data/pgsql_tmp
> unconditionally:
> [snip]
> The reason is that if they stop a postmaster that is
> fork/exec, install
> a non-exec postmaster, and restart, we should still clear out that
> directory.  I guess what i am saying is that I don't want to tie the
> directory format to the exec() case of the binary.

Could do. On the other hand, it is a directory for a small number (usually
zero) of tmp files.

More pertitently, is *anyone* even going to use fork/exec? Whilst there is
no reason (yet) why someone couldn't, other than for development, why would
anyone want to? I've only really been seeing it as a stepping stone to
pushing the Win32 port out...

Cheers,
Claudio

---
Certain disclaimers and policies apply to all email sent from Memetrics.
For the full text of these disclaimers and policies see
<a
href="http://www.memetrics.com/emailpolicy.html">http://www.memetrics.com/em
ailpolicy.html</a>

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Unix timestamp -> timestamp, per Tom Lane :)
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: fork/exec patch