Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility)
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFj8pRD2KTjP27rZpuvdt57vkU6cgc8C3wSzk6ba1Gpdg1kuQg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility) (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello We now haw to solve small puppet issue, because our puppets try to start server too early, when old instance live still. Maybe some new parameter - is_done can be useful. Regards Pavel >>> When the conninfo string including the hostname or port number is >>> specified in -d option, pg_isready displays the wrong information >>> as follows. >>> >>> $ pg_isready -d "port=9999" >>> /tmp:5432 - no response >>> >> >> This is what i asked about in my previous email about precedence of >> the parameters. I can parse that with PQconninfoParse, but what are >> the rules for merging both individual and conninfo params together? > > If I read conninfo_array_parse() correctly, PQpingParams() prefer the > option which is set to its keyword array later. > > Regards, > > -- > Fujii Masao > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: