From: | Asif Naeem <anaeem(dot)it(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_ctl idempotent option |
Date: | 2013-01-28 15:10:05 |
Message-ID: | CAEB4t-MX_m7XoiiObkxV2Ve+XSS+Erm-3GKN7jqBo0t80_z9pA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I am working on reviewing the patch. Patch apply without warning/error on
master branch. My findings are as following i.e.
1. Behavior change in pg_ctl return value i.e.
*
*
* Server already running*
a. Without Patch
inst asif$ ./bin/pg_ctl -D data_test/ -l data_test.log start
pg_ctl: another server might be running; trying to start server anyway
server starting
inst asif$ echo $?
0
b. With Patch
inst_pg_ctl_idempotent_option asif$ ./bin/pg_ctl -D data_test/ -l
> data_test.log start
> pg_ctl: another server might be running
> inst_pg_ctl_idempotent_option asif$ echo $?
> 1
2. -w option seems not working for start as per documentation, it should
return 0.
*Starting already running server with -I -w option*
inst_pg_ctl_idempotent_option asif$ ./bin/pg_ctl -D data_test/ -l
> data_test.log -I -w start
pg_ctl: another server might be running; trying to start server anyway
waiting for server to start........
pg_ctl: this data directory appears to be running a pre-existing postmaster
stopped waiting
pg_ctl: could not start server
Examine the log output.
inst_pg_ctl_idempotent_option asif$ echo $?
1
3. I believe postmaster (DAEMON="$prefix/bin/postmaster") is not going to
accept "-I" option as mentioned in the patch i.e.
contrib/start-scripts/linux
> su - $PGUSER -c "$DAEMON -I -D '$PGDATA' &" >>$PGLOG 2>&
Rest of the patch changes looks good to me. Thanks.
Best Regards,
Asif Naeem
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:06 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 09:05:59AM +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> > I agree, answering the question, whether the particular attempt of
> > starting a server succeeded or not, will need the current behaviour.
> > Now, question is which of these behaviours should be default?
>
> That would work. pg_upgrade knows the cluster version at that point and
> can use the proper flag.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
> EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
>
> + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-01-28 15:11:42 | Re: plpgsql_check_function - rebase for 9.3 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-01-28 15:08:59 | Re: "pg_ctl promote" exit status |