-Original Message-
From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 June 2006 07:09
To: Tom Lane
Cc: Dave Page; Andrew Dunstan; Peter Eisentraut;
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] postmaster.exe vs postgres.exe (was:
CVS HEAD busted on Windows
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 June 2006 14:06
To: Dave Page
Cc: Tom Lane; Peter Eisentraut; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] CVS HEAD busted on Windows?
Dave Page wrote:
As a sidenote on the
Dave Page wrote:
Won't we still need to know if we are called as postmaster or
postgres?
Unless the 'postmaster' instance starts all it's sub processes with an
additional option to tell them they're children (I haven't looked at the
code yet so I dunno if this is how it's done).
For
Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk writes:
though - Magnus
I were wondering if Peter's change means we no longer need to ship
postmaster.exe and postgres.exe with pgInstaller. Presumably
we can just use postgres.exe for everything now?
Won't we still need to know if we are called as
