Re: pg_isready --dbname option is broken. So it should not be in the manual

On Thursday, October 26, 2023, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:

> > On 26 Oct 2023, at 14:20, David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday, October 26, 2023, PG Doc comments form <
> noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org <mailto:noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>> wrote:
> > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
> >
> > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/app-pg-isready.html <
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/app-pg-isready.html>
> > Description:
> >
> > the --dbname option in pg_isready seems not to work propperly. the tool
> > returns 'ok' as long as the cluster itselft is running, no matter how
> wrong
> > the bdname might be.
> >
> > as this seems to be a ~10 year old misbehaviour as per the below thread I
> > think it should be removed from the manual.
> >
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/52840D38.
> 9070604%40agliodbs.com <https://www.postgresql.org/
> message-id/flat/52840D38.9070604%40agliodbs.com>
> >
> > Read the notes section.
>
> The notes section is pretty hidden though, I can sympathize with anyone
> missing
> it and maybe making the info a bit more visible would be good?
>

Add a “see notes” link to those two parameters.

But we put lots of stuff like this into the notes everywhere; DBAs are
expected to look for and read them on the man pages they consume. This
doesn’t seem to fit into the description nor warrants a callout.

David J.