Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

2003-12-18 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
How about the typical answer on Windows ? Create an invisible Window with an Event Handler and pass it a windows message ? Andreas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister Yo

Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

2003-12-16 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Neil Conway said: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> In normal operation the only thing that should be signalling a >> backend is the postmaster. > > Oh? What about LISTEN/NOTIFY? > er, yeah. *self-lart* +" ... or another backend" cheers andrew ---(end o

Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

2003-12-16 Thread Hannu Krosing
Neil Conway kirjutas K, 17.12.2003 kell 00:37: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > In normal operation the only thing that should be signalling a > > backend is the postmaster. > > Oh? What about LISTEN/NOTIFY? IIRC cancelling queries is done by making a connection to a new backend a

Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

2003-12-16 Thread Neil Conway
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In normal operation the only thing that should be signalling a > backend is the postmaster. Oh? What about LISTEN/NOTIFY? -Neil ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to cho

Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

2003-12-16 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Magnus Hagander wrote: Absolutely, but there are other signals to send, no? Or you might want to send a signal directly to a backend (to cancel for example), as you can do on Unix. In normal operation the only thing that should be signalling a backend is the postmaster. cheers andrew --

Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

2003-12-16 Thread Dann Corbit
> -Original Message- > From: Magnus Hagander [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 7:53 AM > To: Andrew Dunstan; PostgreSQL-development; pgsql-hackers-win32 > Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch > > > &g

Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

2003-12-16 Thread Magnus Hagander
> > If you need a response once it has actually run, then the > main thread > > needs to do signal polling now and then. This has the bad > sideeffect > > that the main thread will block completely until the signal is > > delivered, which might be a while. > > > > I don't know what the semant

Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

2003-12-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > >Have you looked at the CONNX signal code on the Win32 page: > > > > http://momjian.postgresql.org/main/writings/pgsql/win32.html > > > >It uses shared memory and events. > > > > > > > > Yes, and I just did again. I guess I must be missing so