Re: possible to create CVS branch for proposed patch?
От | Fred Yankowski |
---|---|
Тема | Re: possible to create CVS branch for proposed patch? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20010214125349.B15597@enteract.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: possible to create CVS branch for proposed patch? (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: possible to create CVS branch for proposed patch?
Re: possible to create CVS branch for proposed patch? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 07:43:25PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Seems like something that should be done in a separate wrapper program. > Littering the backend with vast sections of platform-specific code that > provides optional functional is probably not going to fly, if I can assess > this group correctly. Our plan puts most of the work in a new NT/Cygwin-only version of backend/main.c. If we can use the existing signal() scheme to shut down PG, then we might not have to touch _anything_ else. What do you see in our plan that implies "vast sections of platform-specific code" "littering the backend"? If such changes are necessary, I want to know before we embark on this work. As far as this being "optional functional[ity]", I contend that PostgreSQL has no place as a ready-for-business tool on NT without this (or similar) work so that PG runs cleanly as a service, starting up and shutting down properly. -- Fred Yankowski fred@OntoSys.com tel: +1.630.879.1312 Principal Consultant www.OntoSys.com fax: +1.630.879.1370 OntoSys, Inc 38W242 Deerpath Rd, Batavia, IL 60510, USA
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: