RE: pg_ctl start may return 0 even if the postmaster has been already started on Windows
От | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) |
---|---|
Тема | RE: pg_ctl start may return 0 even if the postmaster has been already started on Windows |
Дата | |
Msg-id | TYAPR01MB58662D7A48E8587A14244097F5EEA@TYAPR01MB5866.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_ctl start may return 0 even if the postmaster has been already started on Windows (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_ctl start may return 0 even if the postmaster has been already started on Windows
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Michael, Thank you for replying! > Not failing on `pg_ctl start` if the command is run on a data folder > that has already been started previously by a different command with a > postmaster still alive feels like cheating, because pg_ctl is lying > about its result. If pg_ctl wants to start a cluster but is not able > to do it, either because the postmaster failed at startup or because > the cluster has already started, it should report a failure. I have a same feelings as you. Users may use the return code in their batch file and they may decide what to do based on the wrong status. Reporting the status more accurately is nice. My first idea is that to move the checking part to above, but this may not handle the case the postmaster is still alive (now sure this is real issue). Do we have to add a new indicator which ensures the identity of processes for windows? Please tell me how you feel. > Now, I > also recall that the processes spawned by pg_ctl on Windows make the > status handling rather tricky to reason about.. Did you say about the below comment? Currently I have no idea to make codes more proper, sorry. ``` * On Windows, we may be checking the postmaster's parent shell, but * that's fine for this purpose. ``` Best Regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: