| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: postgres uptime |
| Date: | 2004-08-20 04:16:46 |
| Message-ID: | 16066.1092975406@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Gavin Sherry wrote:
>> However, I'm not sure why an uptime is all that useful?
> Bragging rights? :)
The folks who have a legitimate interest in that number can surely find
it out from "ps". What I'm having a hard time with here is the value of
allowing the number to be found out remotely. Most sites disabled
remote "ps" decades ago, for good and sufficient reason.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-08-20 04:21:49 | Re: tablespace and sequences? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-08-20 04:09:37 | Re: postgres uptime |