Re: win32 service code
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: win32 service code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 40B64B59.9090906@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | win32 service code ("Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Magnus Hagander wrote: >Hi! > >Last I spoke with Claudio, he was still waiting for some reactions from >others than me on how we want the service code. So I figured I'd post a >recap of the options we have. I've added some advantages/disadvantages, >but those are my thoughts only. There are sure to be others. > > >1) Separate binary "pgservice.exe" that will CreateProcess() the >postmaster.exe. >Advantages: Zero impact on postmaster code. Simple to do. >Disadvantages: Adds a platform-specific binary. > >2) Include in postmaster doing an extra CreateProcess(). >Advantages: No extra binary. Low impact on postmaster code. >Disadvantages: Two postmaster.exe:s. running (confusing? overhead?) > >3) Include in postmaster but running on a separate thread (not process >as (2)) >Advantages: No extra binary. No extra process. Most integration. >Disadvantages: Probably larger impact on postmaster code. > > >As said, I've probably missed some in adv/disadv, but I think I got all >our options. > > Could we combine 1 and 2? We already have the postmaster/postgres distinction in what is in fact the same binary. Of course, there might be an undesirable memory impact - not sure how good Windows is at shared memory. I'm a fan of low impact, but I have no strong opinion on this. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers-win32 по дате отправления: