Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > The reason this is a problem is that somebody, in a fit of inappropriate > > optimization, took out the code that allowed canAcceptConnections to > > distinguish the "not consistent yet" state. > > Oh, no, that's not the case --- the PM_RECOVERY postmaster state does > still distinguish not-ready from ready. The real problem is that what > Bruce implemented has practically nothing to do with what was discussed > last week. PQping is supposed to be smarter about classifying errors > than this.
I was not aware this was discussed last week because I am behind on email. I was fixing a report from a month ago. I did explain how I was doing the tests. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
