Re: BUG #15168: "pg_isready -d" effectively ignores given database name

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "jakelist(at)zoho(dot)com" <jakelist(at)zoho(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #15168: "pg_isready -d" effectively ignores given database name
Date: 2018-04-24 04:29:11
Message-ID: CAKFQuwZb+XrzPJ48ZbO52Yd=oAxFrRhSTK_XXr3Z4kLoL5d8Yw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Monday, April 23, 2018, PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>
wrote:
>
> # Not expected, database "jibberish" does not exist:
> $ pg_isready -d jibberish
> /run/media/jthomas/BackupOne/development/snowdrift/.postgres-work:5432 -
> accepting connections
>

The notes section of the docs for the command cover this behavior. It is
not a bug, the utility answers whether the server will accept connections
generally, not that a specific connection string and credentials are valid.

David J.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2018-04-24 10:57:12 Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug in Physical Replication Slots (at least 9.5)?
Previous Message PG Bug reporting form 2018-04-24 04:15:14 BUG #15168: "pg_isready -d" effectively ignores given database name