Re: win32 service code

[Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>]

Magnus Hagander wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Last I spoke with Claudio, he was still waiting for some reactions from
> others than me on how we want the service code. So I figured I'd post a
> recap of the options we have. I've added some advantages/disadvantages,
> but those are my thoughts only. There are sure to be others. 
>
>
> 1) Separate binary "pgservice.exe" that will CreateProcess() the
> postmaster.exe.
> Advantages: Zero impact on postmaster code. Simple to do.
> Disadvantages: Adds a platform-specific binary.
>
> 2) Include in postmaster doing an extra CreateProcess().
> Advantages: No extra binary. Low impact on postmaster code.
> Disadvantages: Two postmaster.exe:s. running (confusing? overhead?)
>
> 3) Include in postmaster but running on a separate thread (not process
> as (2))
> Advantages: No extra binary. No extra process. Most integration.
> Disadvantages: Probably larger impact on postmaster code.
>
>
> As said, I've probably missed some in adv/disadv, but I think I got all
> our options.
>  

Could we combine 1 and 2? We already have the postmaster/postgres 
distinction in what is in fact the same binary. Of course, there might 
be an undesirable memory impact - not sure how good Windows is at shared 
memory.

I'm a fan of low impact, but I have no strong opinion on this.

cheers

andrew