Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers-win32 <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
Date: 2003-12-16 16:48:12
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>I haven't used message handlers in a long time, but can you use them
> at
>>all unless you are on the desktop? Meaning the Interact With Desktop
>>switch would be required, which in turn rules out any other user than
>>Local System. And that's the same as running as root on Unix, which is
>>something postgresql refuses.
>>Postgresql on windows shuold *definitly* support running with a low
>>privilege account.
> I wasn't sure if (while interactivity set to off) the postmaster would
> be blocked from sending messages to backends.  Requirement in this
> setting should be avoided (google reports all kinds of problems with
> various applications, including IIS).
> As for Local System, most important services on win32 log on as Local
> System by default.  Apache, mysql, etc. (I think, even SQL server)  are
> all configured to run this way, mostly because it causes less hassles
> for the typical win32 user.  Of course, you can lock everything down
> after installation.  Assumptions are just fundamentally different on
> win32.

initdb.c specifically avoids checking for running as root (or 
administrator) on Windows. I assumed the service would run from a 
privileged account.

BTW, is anyone working on building in code to run as a service? Or do we 
plan to use a service wrapper?

>>Is there a decision on which platforms should be supported, other than
>>it's NT4+?
> Personally, I could care less if 95, 98, or ME are supported, and
> neither will the vast majority of win32 IT folks.  IIRC, NT4 supports
> everything we need.  I wouldn't worry about it too much.  

Agreed. NT4+ or even W2K+ should be acceptable. 95/98/ME are all EOLed 
now anyway, aren't they?



In response to

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Steve TibbettDate: 2003-12-16 16:50:25
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2003-12-16 16:45:53
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group