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

Re: pg_ctl idempotent option

From: "Dickson S(dot) Guedes" <listas(at)guedesoft(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Date: 2013-01-15 10:14:36
Message-ID: CAHHcrert_1KPQ7yn=BNBg+0KUUpG9uOufoK=5i+90wtcx1i2YA@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
2013/1/14 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>>>> Here is a patch to add an option -I/--idempotent to pg_ctl, the result
>>>> of which is that pg_ctl doesn't error on start or stop if the server is
>>>> already running or already stopped.
>
>>> Idempotent is a ten-dollar word.  Can we find something that average
>>> people wouldn't need to consult a dictionary to understand?
>
>> --no-error perhaps?
>
> Meh, that's probably going too far in the direction of imprecision.
> The point of this patch is that only very specific errors are
> suppressed.
>
> I don't have a better idea though.  It'd be easier if there were
> separate switches for the two cases, then you could call them
> --ok-if-running and --ok-if-stopped.  But that's not very workable,
> if only because both would want the same single-letter abbreviation.

--ignore-status
--ignore-status-start
--ignore-status-stop

?

Regards
-- 
Dickson S. Guedes
mail/xmpp: guedes(at)guedesoft(dot)net - skype: guediz
http://guedesoft.net - http://www.postgresql.org.br


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Vik ReykjaDate: 2013-01-15 10:26:28
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Previous:From: Michael PaquierDate: 2013-01-15 09:16:59
Subject: Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY

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