Re: -Wformat-zero-length

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: -Wformat-zero-length
Date: 2012-08-14 21:49:11
Message-ID: 502AC7D7.20904@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8/10/12 7:48 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
>
>>> Another thing worth considering is to have pg_upgrade init, stop and
>>> start clusters as necessary instead of requesting the user to do it.
>>> I think this is two less steps.
>>
>> Then you'd need to expose the entire pg_ctl shutdown mode logic through pg_upgrade, which might not make things simpler.
>
> What about having single user mode talk fe/be protocol, and talk to it via a UNIX pipe, with pg_upgrade starting the single user backend as a subprocess?

I think that's essentially equivalent to starting the server on a
Unix-domain socket in a private directory. But that has been rejected
because it doesn't work on Windows.

The question in my mind is, is there some other usable way on Windows
for two unrelated processes to communicate over file descriptors in a
private and secure way?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2012-08-14 21:55:55 Re: macports and brew postgresql --universal builds
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-08-14 21:46:49 Re: SIGFPE handler is naive