Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?
Date: 2025-11-24 18:30:52
Message-ID: 975822.1764009052@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> This is something that *should* be fixed.

What do you think a fix would consist of? The program is working
according to the design goals that were set for it. In particular,
the objective is to test whether the server is up --- and if it
answers back with 'database "foo" does not exist', then yes it's
up. But at the same time, people might not wish to clutter their
server log with failed-connection messages, so we provide the
necessary options to make the test connection attempt a valid one.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron Johnson 2025-11-24 18:31:47 Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2025-11-24 18:18:04 Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?