Re: Re: BUG #5065: pg_ctl start fails as administrator, with "could not locate matching postgres executable"

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Jesse Morris <jmorris(at)coverity(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Re: BUG #5065: pg_ctl start fails as administrator, with "could not locate matching postgres executable"
Date: 2009-10-20 14:48:31
Message-ID: 27134.1256050111@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> The patch doesn't change what the code aims to do, only the way it
> does it. The existing code does this:
> ...
> The net result /should/ be the same, but the second method is
> apparently a little more robust.

Do we have any idea why? I am always distrustful of random changes made
with no theory as to why they fix a problem. My experience is that such
changes are almost always wrong, once you find out what the problem
*really* is.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2009-10-20 15:07:05 Re: Re: BUG #5065: pg_ctl start fails as administrator, with "could not locate matching postgres executable"
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2009-10-20 14:19:27 Re: BUG #5127: AbstractJdbc2Connection#doRollback should throws Exception if connection is closed

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-10-20 14:52:41 Re: Application name patch - v2
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-10-20 14:46:10 Re: Could postgres be much cleaner if a future release skipped backward compatibility?