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

Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O
Date: 2010-01-15 19:48:20
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Do people still use MinGW for any real work? Could we just drop
> walreceiver support from MinGW builds?
> Or maybe we should consider splitting walreceiver into two parts after
> all. Only the bare minimum that needs to access libpq would go into the
> shared object, and the rest would be linked with the backend as usual.

I use MinGW when doing Windows work (e.g. the threading piece in 
parallel pg_restore).  And I think it is generally desirable to be able 
to build on Windows using an open source tool chain. I'd want a damn 
good reason to abandon its use. And I don't like the idea of not 
supporting walreceiver on it either. Please find another solution if 



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-01-15 19:51:14
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O
Previous:From: Matteo BeccatiDate: 2010-01-15 19:38:50
Subject: Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches

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