Re: win32 service code

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

Claudio Natoli wrote:

>  
>
> > My take: If code is there for option 2, let's get it in. ISTM the 
> > installer could make a copy of the postmaster.exe called 
> > pgservice.exe and install the latter as the service. Then you should see 
> > one pgservice and one postmaster instead of two postmasters, right?
> >    
>
> True enough. The only obvious disadvantage being the footprint of the exe,
> both for running and redistribution (already bad enough that we do this for
> postgres.exe).  That kills it from my view.
>
>  

The memory footprint part of this is true whatever you call it.

In that case I agree with your other suggestion of rolling it into 
pg_ctl - it should fit quite nicely, and make it easier for us to make 
sure that both manager aspects do the right thing w.r.t each other.

The "extra thread" option looks too messy at this stage of the game.

cheers

andrew