Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-04 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 September 2001 06:43 > To: dave Page > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000 > > > I thought this might interest you. > **

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-03 Thread Tom Lane
"Ken Hirsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Three can you start cygwin programs on startup of the system? > It's not quite as simple as that. You can run it as a service under the > SRVANY program, but that doesn't provide for a clean shut-down. Has anybody > written an NT service wrapper

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-03 Thread Colin 't Hart
Ian Lance Taylor (& others) wrote: > > This is true. However, a process-pool architecture would benefit Postgres > > on other platforms besides Windows. Postgresql has been ported to the > > HP3000 MPE/iX operating system, for example, which is POSIX-compliant, but > > has an awfully slow fork(

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-03 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
"Ken Hirsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > (To be honest, the idea of worrying about security vulnerabilities on > > Windows seems odd to me. If you are honestly worried about security > > on your database server, the first step is to stop running Windows.) > > That's just a cheap shot. I've

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > "Dwayne Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > As mlw said, porting Postgres to run natively on Windows would be a > significant effort. The forking mechanism it uses currently would > have to be completely rearchitected. The buffer, file manager, and > networki

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-03 Thread Henshall, Stuart - WCP
> "Dwayne Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Well, for one I have no idea what cygwin is, or what it does to > > your system, or what security vulnerabilities it might add to your > > system. It comes with alot of stuff that I may or may not need, but > > what components I need to r

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-03 Thread Ken Hirsch
"Ian Lance Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Dwayne Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Well, for one I have no idea what cygwin is, or what it does to > > your system, or what security vulnerabilities it might add to your > > system. It comes with alot of stuff that I may or may n

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-01 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
"Dwayne Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, for one I have no idea what cygwin is, or what it does to > your system, or what security vulnerabilities it might add to your > system. It comes with alot of stuff that I may or may not need, but > what components I need to run Postgres

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-01 Thread Dwayne Miller
Well, for one I have no idea what cygwin is, or what it does to your system, or what security vulnerabilities it might add to your system. It comes with alot of stuff that I may or may not need, but what components I need to run Postgres is not clear. Two could Postgres be made more

Re: [HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-01 Thread mlw
Dwayne Miller wrote: > > I understand that the current port of Postgres for Windows requires the > cygwin package. I'd like to understand the requirement for cygwin,and > possibly try to port Postgres to run natively on Windows as a NT/2K > service. Anyone like to identify the challenges in suc

[HACKERS] Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000

2001-09-01 Thread Dwayne Miller
I understand that the current port of Postgres for Windows requires the cygwin package. I'd like to understand the requirement for cygwin,and possibly try to port Postgres to run natively on Windows as a NT/2K service. Anyone like to identify the challenges in such a port? Is it at all poss