Re: Bug? 'psql -l' in pg_ctl?
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bug? 'psql -l' in pg_ctl? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200012092013.PAA25845@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bug? 'psql -l' in pg_ctl? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Seems like this functionality belongs in pg_ctl. > > I'd lean towards a pg_ping (Peter E., any comment here?) > > > Really we'd need to change the postmaster too, because what we need to > > do is send a query "are you ready to accept connections?" that the > > postmaster will answer without an authentication exchange. AFAIR this > > is *not* immediately evident from the postmaster's current behavior --- > > I think it will challenge you for a password even before the startup > > subprocess is done. > > I fixed that today; if the database status is not open-for-business, > the postmaster will tell you so right away instead of making you go > through the authentication protocol first. So a pg_ping could be > written that just sends a connection request packet and sees what > comes back. > > However, if we're running in TRUST or IDENT mode, it's possible that > that technique will lead to launching a backend to no purpose. So > maybe we ought to extend the postmaster protocol to have a "query > status" packet type. Thoughts? > > regards, tom lane > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: