| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Harold Giménez <harold(dot)gimenez(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade improvements |
| Date: | 2012-04-05 15:07:58 |
| Message-ID: | 201204051707.58531.andres@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thursday, April 05, 2012 04:44:11 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andres Freund (andres(at)anarazel(dot)de) wrote:
> > I wonder if it wouldn't be better to pass a named pipe under windows and
> > use a AF_UNIX socket everwhere else. Both should be pretty easily usable
> > with the existing code. PG already seems to use named pipes under
> > windows, so...
>
> I didn't think Tom's suggestion was really all that difficult to
> implement and sounds like a more-generally-useful change anyway (which
> you might want to use outside of this specific use case).
Hm. Changing libpq to use two pipes at the same time sounds considerably more
invasive than basically just changing the socket creation and some minor
details.
Why would pipes be more useful? Its not like you could build useful pipelines
with them.
Also, it might open a window for implementing AF_UNIX like connections on
windows...
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2012-04-05 15:20:04 | Re: pg_upgrade improvements |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2012-04-05 14:44:11 | Re: pg_upgrade improvements |