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

Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Pedro Gimeno" <pgsql-003(at)personal(dot)formauri(dot)es>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Gerhard Leykam" <gel123(at)sealsystems(dot)de>
Subject: Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal
Date: 2009-10-16 15:48:05
Message-ID: 7164.1255708085@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> It seems like pg_ping (client utility and related postmaster support)
> should be a discrete patch.  Improvements to pg_ctl and init scripts
> would come later, as separate patches?

Sounds sane to me.  Alternatively, do the postmaster support and make
the presumably-minor pg_ctl mods to use it, and then a standalone
pg_ping utility could come later.  I'm not sure how big the utility
would be, but surely bigger than the delta in pg_ctl.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2009-10-16 15:58:14
Subject: Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2009-10-16 15:32:41
Subject: Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal

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