Re: Win32 question: getppid() with no parent?

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "PgSql-Win32" <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Win32 question: getppid() with no parent?
Date: 2004-05-27 18:14:37
Message-ID: 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE1716A5@algol.sollentuna.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32

>> Question though - we keep a PostmasterPid variable, right?
>
>Yeah we do; we must have it to signal the postmaster from the children.
>
>> (If we can't rely on that variable, we could do a win32 specific hack
>> that passes the HANDLE of the postmaster down to the child on exec, I
>> guess.)
>
>Is this just like passing a variable value, or is there some more
>protection involved?

It is passing a variable. *Before* you parse it, you have to make it
inheritable by doing something along the line of:
DuplicateHandle(GetCurrentProcess(), GetCurrentProcess(),
GetCurrentProcess(), &targetHandle, 0, TRUE, DUPLICATE_SAME_ACCESS);

(If you just do GetCurrentProcess() it will return a hard-coded
pseudohandle. So if you use that handle in the child process, it will
point to the child process. DuplicateHandle will turn it into a real
handle)

//Magnus

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2004-05-27 18:29:17 Re: Primary Key results in endless loop
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2004-05-27 18:10:06 Re: Win32 question: getppid() with no parent?