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

Re: pg_ctl idempotent option

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Date: 2013-01-29 21:34:50
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 1/28/13 9:29 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> pg_upgrade uses that to find out of the server was already running or if
> we started it.  This is to start the server to remove the
> file.

It's currently a bit missed up anyway.  pg_ctl start is successful if
the server is already started, but pg_ctl -w start fails.

What pg_upgrade is doing doesn't sound particularly safe, for example
when something is concurrently starting or stopping the server.

> Also, no one has explained how not knowing if -o
> options were used was a safe.

Hmm, good point.  But we already have this problem -- see above.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2013-01-29 22:03:08
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Previous:From: Marko TiikkajaDate: 2013-01-29 20:37:12
Subject: Re: pg_dump --pretty-print-views

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