Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_ctl idempotent option

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Date: 2013-01-30 21:35:11
Message-ID: 20130130213511.GA12299@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 04:07:45PM +1100, Josh Berkus wrote:
> 
> >>> I don't think I like --force because it isn't clear if we are forcing
> >>> the start to have done something, or forcing the server to be running.
> > 
> > Do we need this idempotent feature for "stop" too?
> 
> Yes, of course.

If idempotent only affects -w (we don't wait for the return code without
-w), can we make -W to be idempotent?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jan UrbaƄskiDate: 2013-01-30 21:55:04
Subject: Re: plpgsql versus SPI plan abstraction
Previous:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2013-01-30 21:29:47
Subject: Re: plpgsql versus SPI plan abstraction

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group