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