From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_ctl idempotent option |
Date: | 2013-01-28 15:40:08 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nM+o6O2sbw5zjBQrq2ZHBkdxs3HatQTpjJZQZSP20V7dug@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 14 January 2013 15:29, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> > Here is a patch to add an option -I/--idempotent to pg_ctl, the result
>> > of which is that pg_ctl doesn't error on start or stop if the server is
>> > already running or already stopped.
>>
>> Idempotent is a ten-dollar word. Can we find something that average
>> people wouldn't need to consult a dictionary to understand?
>
> --no-error perhaps?
I think --force would be the accepted way to ensure something happens
as specified
Mind you, I'm not sure I see the value in throwing an error if the
server is in the desired state already. Who actually wants that
behaviour? Can't we just change the behaviour? Existing scripts would
still work, since we are simply skipping an error.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-01-28 15:44:54 | Re: Re: proposal: a width specification for s specifier (format function), fix behave when positional and ordered placeholders are used |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2013-01-28 15:38:48 | Re: plpgsql_check_function - rebase for 9.3 |