This doesn't need to be perfect, IMNSHO, just functional.
Someone (who?) needs to make a call.
My take: If code is there for option 2, let's get it in. ISTM the
installer could make a copy of the postmaster.exe called pgservice.exe
and install the latter as the service. Then you should see one pgservice
and one postmaster instead of two postmasters, right?
cheers
andrew
Claudio Natoli wrote:
>My 2c,
>
>
>
>>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.
>>
>>
>
>My preference. Personally, I think we should make this pg_ctl.
>
>
>
>
>>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?)
>>
>>
>
>This is what I've currently got. I pretty much hate seeing two
>postmaster.exe/s running.
>
>
>
>
>>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.
>>
>>
>
>IMHO, the worst of all options.
>
>I'm itching to throw this code somewhere :-)
>
>Cheers,
>Claudio
>
>---
>Certain disclaimers and policies apply to all email sent from Memetrics.
>For the full text of these disclaimers and policies see
><a
>href="http://www.memetrics.com/emailpolicy.html">http://www.memetrics.com/em
>ailpolicy.html</a>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
>
>