[patch edited + resubmitted for review; not for committing]
Hi Tom,
figuring that, on balance, you are in fact going to prefer to take a
potential future hit in duplicated work (in passing context in the fork/exec
case) over moving the client auth code to PostgresMain, I've just gone ahead
and made a patch that implements your BackendFork ideas...
Please let me know:
* if the changes to the BackendFork / SubPostmasterMain logic are more or
less what you envisaged, and if you are content with them [Note: we can also
roll BackendInit back into BackendFork, making BackendFork (now BackendRun?)
pretty much exactly as it was before the fork/exec changes began]
* if you are content with the above, whether or not you think I ought to do
the same for the SSDataBase logic. I'm hoping for a negative, as the #ifdef
logic is not as convoluted as that originally presented in BackendFork (ie.
to me, it looks like overkill in this case), but anticipating otherwise :-)
Also:
* are you ok with the pgstat changes (I'm guessing yes, as you haven't
mentioned them, and since these changes are pretty similar to what you
suggested for BackendFork)
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>
