Re: WIN32 native ... lets start?!?

From: Joerg Hessdoerfer <Joerg(dot)Hessdoerfer(at)sea-gmbh(dot)com>
To: "Magnus Naeslund(f)" <mag(at)fbab(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIN32 native ... lets start?!?
Date: 2002-05-16 20:35:58
Message-ID: 200205162036.g4GKakJp029062@smtp.netcologne.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thursday 16 May 2002 22:10, you wrote:
[...]
>
> What is the biggest problem here?
> The Shmem/IPC stuff, or the fork() stuff?
> I'm think that we could do a fork() implementation in usermode by copying
> the memory allocations. How fast that would be regarding the context
> switches, i don't know, but i'm willing to experiment some to see how
> feesible this is...
>
> Anyone tried this before?
>
> Magnus
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

The problem is not the fork() call itself, this has been done (MinGW and
cygwin I know of, possibly others) but the speed of fork() on windows, it's
creepingly slow (due to usermode copy, I assume ;-).

IPC needs to be done, I'm just about to start...

Greetings,
Joerg
--
Leading SW developer - S.E.A GmbH
Mail: joerg(dot)hessdoerfer(at)sea-gmbh(dot)com
WWW: http://www.sea-gmbh.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nigel J. Andrews 2002-05-16 22:49:18 libpgtcl - backend version information patch
Previous Message Michael Alan Dorman 2002-05-16 20:30:01 Re: Queries using rules show no rows modified?