On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > > One option that would simplify things is to fix only non-Windows in the > back > > branches, via socket protection, and fix Windows in HEAD only. We could > even > > do so by extending HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS support to Windows through named > pipes. > > +1 for that solution, if it's not an unreasonable amount of work to add > named-pipe sockets in Windows. That would offer a feature to Windows > users that they didn't have before, ie the ability to restrict connections > based on filesystem permissions; so it seems useful quite aside from any > "make check" considerations. >
I think it might be a bigger piece of work than we'd like - and IIRC that's one of the reasons we didn't do it from the start. Named pipes on windows do act as files on Windows, but they do *not* act as sockets. As in, they return HANDLEs, not SOCKETs, and you can't recv() and send() on them. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
