| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ryan Murphy <ryanfmurphy(at)gmail(dot)com>, Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctl start without --wait |
| Date: | 2017-01-19 14:57:23 |
| Message-ID: | 20170119145723.GQ18360@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Peter Eisentraut (peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> On 1/18/17 3:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Anybody who has got a script that runs pg_ctl unattended mode likely
> > now has to go update that script to add --no-wait.
>
> The state of init scripts and other start scripts out there is such a
> mess, it's hard to make general statements like this. Many start
> scripts still start the postmaster directly and have confusing or
> outdated advice about whether or not to use pg_ctl. Some implement
> their own waiting logic after starting. Some just ignore the issue and
> do wrong or inconsistent things.
>
> With this change, together with the systemd support that is already out
> there with 9.6, and with the new promote wait support, we'll at least
> have a consistent approach going forward and have a better shot at
> sorting out the current mess.
+1.
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-01-19 14:59:37 | Re: Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctl start without --wait |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-01-19 14:55:35 | Re: Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctl start without --wait |