From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers-win32 <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Committing Resources to Win32 |
Date: | 2003-11-12 03:33:19 |
Message-ID: | 200311120333.hAC3XJ502895@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >> Specifically, I believe and through conversations with several Win32
> >>
> >>
> >programmers I know, that using create process is a bad idea and that we
> >should move to a threaded model (at least for Win32).
> >
> >CreateProcess appears to be the method the core developers have decided
> >upon. Unfortunately, and speaking from experience, unless either the
> >decision to use MingW as a build environment is reviewed (as opposed to
> >VC++, for instance), or MingW "soon" supports thread local storage
> >declspecs, a threaded implementation would be just too difficult to
> >integrate cleanly with the existing source base.
> >
> >
> >
>
> The requirement is that we can build with opensource tools. I'm quite
> prepared to buy the (cheap version of) VC++, but only as a last resort.
Actually, I think the requirement wasn't that we can build with
open-source tools, but rather that we can build using the same toolchain
we have under Unix. The concern was that a separate build environment
made up of Visual C project files was not maintainable. MinGW allows us
to use that same tool chain, as does Cygwin as well.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-11-12 03:35:56 | Re: Committing Resources to Win32 |
Previous Message | Marsh Ray | 2003-11-12 03:20:17 | Re: Committing Resources to Win32 |