| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: -d option for pg_isready is broken |
| Date: | 2013-11-19 18:22:39 |
| Message-ID: | 528BAC6F.7070806@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/19/2013 10:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
>>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/app-pg-isready.html
>>
>> Attached is the updated version of the patch. Is there any other bug?
>
> Not that I can see, but it's not very future-proof. If libpq changes
> its idea of what will provoke database-name expansion, this will again
> be broken.
Why aren't we using the exact same code as psql? Why does pg_isready
have its own code for this?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-11-19 18:25:39 | Re: Data corruption issues using streaming replication on 9.0.14/9.2.5/9.3.1 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-11-19 18:20:47 | Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block |