This is a lot like what I was planning to work towards with the
refactoring of the forkexec code I promised to do for 8.1.
Cool. BTW, have we accepted that EXEC_BACKEND is the way we're
going to
workaround the lack of fork() on Win32 for the foreseeable future? I
mean, it _works_, but it's
Magnus Hagander wrote:
This is a lot like what I was planning to work towards with the
refactoring of the forkexec code I promised to do for 8.1.
Cool. BTW, have we accepted that EXEC_BACKEND is the way we're going to
workaround the lack of fork() on Win32 for the foreseeable future? I
mean, it
While going through the usual motions needed to fork a child
process of
the postmaster, it occurred to me that there's a fair bit of
duplicated
code involved. There are also #ifdef for various situations (BeOS,
LINUX_PROFILE, and EXEC_BACKEND), which makes the code yet
more ugly. I
think we
While going through the usual motions needed to fork a child process of
the postmaster, it occurred to me that there's a fair bit of duplicated
code involved. There are also #ifdef for various situations (BeOS,
LINUX_PROFILE, and EXEC_BACKEND), which makes the code yet more ugly. I
think we
