From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_ctl and port number detection |
Date: | 2010-12-18 23:08:04 |
Message-ID: | 201012182308.oBIN84713812@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > pg_ctl.c::test_postmaster_connection() has some fragile code that tries
> > to detect the server port number by looking in the pg_ctl -o string,
>
> It may be fragile, but it works; or at least I've not heard complaints
> about it lately.
True.
> > I think a simpler solution would be to look in postmaster.pid:
> > pg_ctl already knows the data directory. If the file is missing, the
> > server is not running. If the file exists, the first number on the last
> > line, divided by 1000, is the port number.
>
> That's somewhere between fragile and outright wrong.
Please explain why my idea is not an improvement.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-18 23:21:34 | Re: pg_ctl and port number detection |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-18 23:02:25 | Re: pg_ctl and port number detection |