Re: pg_ctl idempotent item removed

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent item removed
Date: 2013-05-03 18:42:05
Message-ID: CAMkU=1xNWNajpiXbPQUyDH5gkz===vUT8HB=RSPF8bgT7QZTmg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:

> I have removed both pg_ctl idempotent-commit items from the TODO list:
>
> <listitem>
> <para>
> Allow pg_ctl --idempotent to a 'success' return code if the
> requested
> start/stop action fails, but the cluster is already in the
> requested
> state (Peter Eisentraut)
> </para>
> </listitem>
>
> <listitem>
> <para>
> Change pg_ctl to return an error code if start fails because the
> server is already running (Peter Eisentraut)
> </para>
> </listitem>
>
> My question is do we really want the second item reverted?
>

Are those parts easily severable? They don't appear to be to me.

I think that if we had time to sort out the issue before beta, we could
just as easily sort out both issues and so not revert either one of them.

Also, changing the long-standing behavior and not providing an option to
neutralize that change for people who depended on it doesn't seem like a
good idea to me.

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2013-05-03 18:43:09 Re: Commit subject line
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2013-05-03 18:34:54 Re: matview niceties: pick any two of these three