Re: [NOVICE] pg_ctl command option anomalies
| От | Neha Khatri |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [NOVICE] pg_ctl command option anomalies |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFO0U+9SQAT2U0dS6NJ8rP+O1JTYe9XoGrdzh940qfdpom7T0w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [NOVICE] pg_ctl command option anomalies (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [NOVICE] pg_ctl command option anomalies
|
| Список | pgsql-novice |
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Neha Khatri <nehakhatri5@gmail.com> writes:
> Some of the pg_ctl modes do not require following options:
> -m, -w, -t, -c, -l, -o, -p
Um ... all of those except -c and -w require an argument AFAIK. Where did
you read that they don't?
I did not mean that they don't require an argument. What I was trying to refer is that "pg_ctl status" would not require a "-m fast", for instance. Would there be a functional difference if I execute following commands:
pg_ctl status -D data/ -m fast
pg_ctl status -D data/ -m smart
pg_ctl status -D data/ -m immediate
If no, then -m does not seem a valid option for "pg_ctl status".But I am allowed to execute all of the above.
Regards,
Neha
Neha
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: