On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 09:08:31AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 07:18:04PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
OK, done with the attached patch Three is returned for status, but one
for other cases.
I
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 09:07:24AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
One reason could be that as we are already returning special exit code
for 'status' option of pg_ctl (exit(3)), this seems to be inline with it as
this
also get
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 07:18:04PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
OK, done with the attached patch Three is returned for status, but one
for other cases.
I think it would have been better if it return status as 4 for cases where
directory/file is not accessible (current new cases added by this
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 07:18:04PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
OK, done with the attached patch Three is returned for status, but one
for other cases.
I think it would have been better if it return status as 4 for cases
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 09:54:57AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
If they haven't passed us a data directory, we don't really know if the
server is running or not, so the patch just returns '1'.
But for such cases, isn't the status 4 more appropriate?
As per above link 4 program or service
On Mar6, 2014, at 00:08 , Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I have addressed this issue with the attached patch:
$ pg_ctl -D /lkjasdf status
pg_ctl: directory /lkjasdf does not exist
$ pg_ctl -D / status
pg_ctl: directory / is not a database cluster directory
Bruce Momjian escribió:
Technically, you are right, but I tried a while ago to assign meaningful
values to all the exit locations and the community feedback I got was
that we didn't want that.
That sounds odd. Do you have a link?
--
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Bruce Momjian escribió:
Technically, you are right, but I tried a while ago to assign meaningful
values to all the exit locations and the community feedback I got was
that we didn't want that.
That sounds odd. Do you have a link?
FWIW, I
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:17:55PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian escribió:
Technically, you are right, but I tried a while ago to assign meaningful
values to all the exit locations and the community feedback I got was
that we didn't want that.
That sounds odd. Do you have
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 09:54:57AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
If they haven't passed us a data directory, we don't really know if the
server is running or not, so the patch just returns '1'.
But for such cases, isn't the
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:17:55PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian escribió:
Technically, you are right, but I tried a while ago to assign meaningful
values to all the exit locations and the community feedback I got was
that we didn't want
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 10:43:01PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:17:55PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian escribi�:
Technically, you are right, but I tried a while ago to assign meaningful
values to all the exit
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 09:07:24AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
One reason could be that as we are already returning special exit code
for 'status' option of pg_ctl (exit(3)), this seems to be inline with it as
this
also get called during status command.
Also in the link sent by you in
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:31:30AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
This doesn't seem right:
$ pg_ctl -D /nowhere status
pg_ctl: no server running
It does exit with status 3, so it's not all that broken, but I think the
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 4:38 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:31:30AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
This doesn't seem right:
$ pg_ctl -D /nowhere status
pg_ctl: no server running
It
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
This doesn't seem right:
$ pg_ctl -D /nowhere status
pg_ctl: no server running
It does exit with status 3, so it's not all that broken, but I think the
error message could be more accurate.
I doubt anyone will object
This doesn't seem right:
$ pg_ctl -D /nowhere status
pg_ctl: no server running
It does exit with status 3, so it's not all that broken, but I think the
error message could be more accurate.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your
17 matches
Mail list logo
