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

Re: pg_ctl idempotent option

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Date: 2013-01-15 16:06:44
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2013-01-15 16:08:45
Previous:From: Andres FreundDate: 2013-01-15 16:04:25
Subject: Re: Curious buildfarm failures

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group