Tom Lane writes: > BTW, I've been wondering lately if we'd not be better off to look at > using threading in the Windows port, if it'd help us get around the > fork/exec data transfer problem. I'm not sure that it would, > mind you, but if it would give an answer it might be a lot less painful than > solving the data transfer problem directly.
Some coincidence. Was just about to post a message to the hackers-win32 list, asking if anyone was considering using threads for the Windows port, and why/if sub-processes were the preferred option (from the TODO items on http://momjian.postgresql.org/main/writings/pgsql/win32.html mention CreateProcess). Having looked at the code for the first time over the past day and a half, I'm quite sure that using threads is the easier option (and, generally, replacing fork/exec with winthreads is easier than using CreateProcess). FWIW, I've got a threaded version of the WIN32_DEV branch more or less "running" (it is a terrible hack job, so NO, no patches... yet :-), as a proof of concept. Still a work in progress (ok, I've qualified it enough), but it is showing enough promise to convince me that threading is the way to go for the Win32 port. Anyone else experienced with the code base care to weigh in on this? Cheers, Claudio --- WE HAVE MOVED - PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW CONTACT DETAILS: THE BASEMENT, 33 EWELL STREET, BALMAIN NSW 2041 TEL: +61 2 9555 1544 FAX: +61 2 9555 6911 Certain disclaimers and policies apply to all email sent from Memetrics. For the full text of these disclaimers and policies see http://www.memetrics.com/emailpolicy.html ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
