Re: [HACKERS] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?

Claudio Natoli wrote:
>
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > Speaking of which, any ETA on this? Bruce? If anyone from
> > core can indicate
> > > how they'd like this architected (from the perspective of code
> > > rearrangement), I'm willing to have a crack at this.
> >
> > http://momjian.postgresql.org/main/writings/pgsql/win32.html
>
> No, sorry, I should have been clearer. Here I was referring specifically to
> the fork/exec parts, not the entire porting effort.
>
> [I remembered a post of yours of a few weeks ago, mentioning that the
> fork/exec bits might be in in "a few weeks"; something along the lines of
> that it was taking you a while not due to "issues", but simply a lack of
> time (can't find the exact message; might be mis-remembering)]
>
> Probably something you are close to completing, but if not, and you can
> describe how you'd prefer any rearrangement, I'm happy taking this one.

I am ready to work with anyone to make fork/exec happen. It requires we
find out what globals are being set by the postmaster, and have the
child run those same routines. I can show you examples of what I have
done and walk you through areas that need work. If you look at the
EXEC_BACKEND defines in CVS, you can see what I have done so far. We
need to have EXEC_BACKEND working on Unix first, then we can add the
CreateProcess call on Win32, so all this can be done on Unix first.

--
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