Re: [HACKERS] Make pg_regress print a connstring with sockdir
От | Craig Ringer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Make pg_regress print a connstring with sockdir |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMsr+YEukaJMUe7mNNRV+D-hGT0KxURBi2r2a5MuhAFonWbYfg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Make pg_regress print a connstring with sockdir (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Make pg_regress print a connstring with sockdir
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 28 August 2017 at 19:45, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> It's a pain having to find the postmaster command line to get the port
> pg_regress started a server on. We print the port in the pg_regress output,
> why not the socket directory / host?
I'm not following the point here. The test postmaster isn't really
going to be around long enough to connect to it manually. If you
want to do that, you should be using "installcheck", and then the
problem doesn't arise.
The reason for printing the port number, if memory serves, is to
aid in debugging port selection conflicts. That doesn't really
apply for temporary socket directories; we're expecting libc to
avoid any conflicts there.
I'm frequently debugging postmasters that are around long enough. Deadlocks, etc.
It's also way easier to debug shmem related issues with a live postmaster vs a core.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: