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 18:47:43
Message-ID: 982229.1764010063@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:
> "Option exists, is mentioned in --help, but doesn't do anything" is a (very
> low priority) bug. That's plain and simple.

Plain, simple, and wrong. It does do something. Maybe not something
you care about, but that could be said of a lot of options.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron Johnson 2025-11-24 18:48:40 Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?
Previous Message Ron Johnson 2025-11-24 18:31:47 Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?