Re: [WIP] pg_ping utility
| От | Michael Paquier |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [WIP] pg_ping utility |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAB7nPqR+sDGkiYEBnq1qEdQvp5yUw-xz1RChnUPq7Xe+i4G0tg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [WIP] pg_ping utility (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
-- On 11/23/12 9:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:Personally, I still don't see the general utility of this. For
> We waited a couple of days for feedback for this feature. So based on
> all the comments provided by everybody on this thread, perhaps we should
> move on and implement the options that would make pg_ping a better
> wrapper for PQPing. Comments?
monitoring, psql -c 'select 1' is much more useful. For network
analysis, you can use network analysis tools. The niche for pg_ping in
between those is so narrow that I cannot see it.
As a wrapper for PQPing, you can get different server status specific to libpq which are PQPING_OK, PQPING_REJECT and PQPING_NO_RESPONSE, and perhaps more in the future if PQPing is extended in a way or another. So the purpose of this feature is to allow users to put there hands on a core feature that would allow them to get a libpq-specific server status, and to check the accessibility to the server with something lighter than a psql client connection. Any additional comments Phil?
Michael Paquier
http://michael.otacoo.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: