On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Dustin Sallings wrote:
>
> On Nov 14, 2003, at 14:13, jini us wrote:
>
> > I would class your solution as a work around
> > rather than a "natural solution".
>
> It really seemed like the obvious way to do it (I'm sure I'm not the
> only person who thought of that, but didn't post it).
LOL, I was just composing and then aborted an answer mentioning mindsets and it
being natural to me.
>
> > Anyway I am using MS windows and to implement
> > postgres as embedded, using your approach, would
> > probably become complicated.
> > .It would probably introduce unwanted bugs in my
> > software.
>
> I believe it would be you introducing those bugs if you do not
> initialize the DB correctly, regardless of the mechanism.
An objection made, if I read the edited out sections correctly, that a user
shouldn't have to worry about formating the chosen disk etc, it should just
happen. Well there's nothing in this solution that prevents that from
happening. Indeed, if there's no user involvement in configuring a linked in
embedded solution then there's no user involvement required in the
configuration. How does "no user involvement required" morph into "user must do
stuff"?
>
> Now, how many bugs do you think it would create in postgres if the
> entire interface model were changed from postmaster/postgres processes
> to having multiple threads in a single application trying to issue
> queries in the in-process DB. What happens to the DB when your app
> segfaults? Are there any signal handlers postgres uses that you would
> want to use in your app? Do you really need to redesign the way
> postgres works just because you don't want to manage the resource as a
> process rather than a different type of API?
Write a library that provides the API required to which the app. can be linked
but which chats/controls the server.
If I want to find files in one directory (or folder :) that exist in another I
don't ask that bash, korn shell etc. be linked with a new library for the
job. No, I use the existing components in a combination that does the job.
--
Nigel J. Andrews
( ( cd onedirectory; ls ); ( cd otherdirectory; ls ) ) | sort | uniq -d
if you really want to know.
