Re: pg_upgrade improvements
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade improvements |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 201204051730.26045.andres@anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade improvements (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_upgrade improvements
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Not sure if were just missing each others point? On Thursday, April 05, 2012 05:20:04 PM Stephen Frost wrote: > > Why would pipes be more useful? Its not like you could build useful > > pipelines with them. > > The point is to avoid the risk that someone else could connect to the > database at the same time you're doing work on it. I got that. I just fail to see what the advantage of using two pipes instead of one socket as every other plain connection would be? Using named pipes solves that tidbit from Tom: > Notions like private socket directories don't solve this because we don't > have that option available on Windows. If you have named pipes or AF_UNIX sockets you can solve that by either just passing the fd to your child and not allowing any access to it (no problem on either platform) or by using a private directory. Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: