Re: PG+Cygwin Production Experience (was RE: Path to PostgreSQL porta biliy)
От | Cyril VELTER |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PG+Cygwin Production Experience (was RE: Path to PostgreSQL porta biliy) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 006101c1f765$ae6b7500$6901a8c0@cvfixe обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PG+Cygwin Production Experience (was RE: Path to PostgreSQL porta biliy) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> > "Henshall, Stuart - WCP" <SHenshall@westcountrypublications.co.uk> writes: > > Cygwin is not the only additon needed, cygipc will also be needed (GPL) > > (see: http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/cygipc/index.html ) > > Good point, but is this a requirement that we could get rid of, now that > we have the SysV IPC stuff somewhat isolated? AFAICT cygipc provides > the SysV IPC API (shmget, semget, etc) --- but if there are usable > equivalents in the basic Cygwin environment, we could probably use them > now. > > Considering how often we see the forgot-to-start-cygipc mistake, > removing this requirement would be a clear win. > > regards, tom lane In my experience, cygipc is the most tricky part in a postgresql/cygwin install (mainly because because of access rights problem). Using native call for sem / shm will be a good step forward (and the API change might make this quite easy). I've also never been able to start two postmaster instance on the same box. Doing so is messing shared memory leading to both postmaster crashing. cyril
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: