Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On 1/14/13 10:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Also it appears to me that the hunk at lines 812ff is changing the
>> default behavior, which is not what the patch is advertised to do.

> True, I had forgotten to mention that.

> Since it's already the behavior for start, another option would be to
> just make it the default for stop as well and forget about the extra
> options.  I'm not sure whether there is a big use case for getting an
> error code on stop if the server is already stopped.

Actually, I seem to recall having had to hack Red Hat's initscript
because the LSB standard requires that stopping a not-running server
*not* be an error.  So +1 for forgetting about the option entirely
and just making it idempotent all the time.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: pg_ctl idempotent option at 2013-01-15 15:51:53 from Peter Eisentraut

Responses

• Re: pg_ctl idempotent option at 2013-01-19 01:48:08 from Phil Sorber
• Re: pg_ctl idempotent option at 2013-01-22 12:33:28 from Ashutosh Bapat

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Stephen Frost	Date: 2013-01-15 16:08:45
	Subject: Re: [PATCH] COPY .. COMPRESSED
Previous:	From: Andres Freund	Date: 2013-01-15 16:04:25
	Subject: Re: Curious buildfarm failures