| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Ryan Murphy <ryanfmurphy(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctl start without --wait |
| Date: | 2017-01-02 18:09:57 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYdxdxS6A+1JeBzj9Fh4yQHYZiK7_VxvDh8_V6TkOvYdg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
> On 12/23/16 6:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> Is there still a use case for --no-wait in the real world?
>>
>> Sure. Most system startup scripts aren't going to want to wait.
>> If we take it out those people will go back to starting the postmaster
>> by hand.
>
> Presumably they could just background it... since it's not going to be
> long-lived it's presumably not that big a deal. Though, seems like many
> startup scripts like to make sure what they're starting is actually working.
Making --wait the default may or may not be sensible -- I'm not sure
-- but removing --no-wait is clearly a bad idea, and we shouldn't do
it. The fact that the problems created by removing it might be
solvable doesn't mean that it's a good idea to create them in the
first place.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ryan Murphy | 2017-01-02 18:14:34 | Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctl start without --wait |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-01-02 18:06:25 | Re: merging some features from plpgsql2 project |