From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Gerhard Leykam" <gel123(at)sealsystems(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal |
Date: | 2009-10-15 18:52:59 |
Message-ID: | 11911.1255632779@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Sounds good to me, other than it stalls pg_ctl revamp until pg_ping is
> done. I don't remember a clear design of what pg_ping should look
> like. Does anyone have a clear plan in their head?
I don't think anyone's written down a full spec, but it seems like a
relatively trivial thing to me.
* Client connects to the usual place and sends a packet that has a
special "protocol number" (similar to the way we handle SSL requests).
AFAICS there wouldn't need to be anything else in the packet.
* Postmaster responds with a suitable message and closes the connection.
The message should at least include the current postmaster
CanAcceptConnections status and the PID/magic number we were just
discussing. I can't think of anything else offhand --- anyone else?
I'm not sure whether we'd want to provide a function within libpq
for this, or just code it in pg_ctl. Within libpq the natural
thing would be to take a conninfo connection string, but I'm not
sure that suits pg_ctl's purposes.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-10-15 18:55:44 | Re: Postgresql 8.4.1 segfault, backtrace |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-10-15 18:46:41 | Re: BUG #5118: start-status-insert-fatal |