Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I now notice that "pg_ctl -w start" fails if the postgres db is missing. > I am not sure that changing pg_ctl to use this rather than template1 was > a good thing, and it can't be overridden. I suggest we revert that > particular change - it seems to me to confer little to no benefit, > unlike the case with createdb etc.
pg_ctl -w is already incredibly fragile because it needs a working password-free login name. Rather than worrying about whether the database name exists, what we ought to do is invent the long-awaited "ping" extension to the postmaster protocol --- something that would just ask "are you up and ready to accept connections" without having to specify a valid user *or* database name. You can sort of do this today if you are willing to examine the error message that comes back from the postmaster, but I think it'd be cleaner to have an official protocol extension. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org