Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
Date
Msg-id CABUevEx4_1j5eraBFX=6AgeCW4A4mawg6P4=JVcyH_9Fp4MF5Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
>> Windows does not have socketpair(), nor a strict pipe() equivalent.  I expect
>> switching to socketpair() makes the Windows side trickier in some ways and
>> simpler in others.  +1 for exploring that direction first.
>
> A bit of googling suggests that emulating socketpair() on Windows is not
> that hard: basically you create an accepting socket and connect to it.
> Ugly I guess but likely to be nicer than emulating the two-pipes trick
> exactly.

That sounds a lot like what we were doing in pgpipe() before..  It was
removed in d2c1740dc275543a46721ed254ba3623f63d2204, but that's
because it was dead at the time. Do we need to bring it back?

-- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Is this non-volatile pointer access OK?
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade bugs