From: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [WIP] pg_ping utility |
Date: | 2012-10-15 21:28:36 |
Message-ID: | CAA-aLv40r-g8ROMkNUv7KcML0rMH241e51YD7SbLTsrP1R=n8g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13 October 2012 22:19, Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com> wrote:
> Based on a previous thread
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-10/msg00131.php) I
> have put together a first attempt of a pg_ping utility. I am attaching
> two patches. One for the executable and one for the docs.
>
> I would also like to make a regression tests and translations, but
> wanted to get feedback on what I had so far.
pg_pong:
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 2 days
Well this works for me, and I raised a couple typos directly to Phil.
The advantage of this over "pg_ctl status" is that it doesn't have to
be run on the machine local to the database, and access to the data
directory isn't required if it is run locally. The advantage over
connecting using a regular connection is that authentication and
authorisation isn't necessary, and if all connections are in use, it
will still return the desired result. And it does what it says on the
tin.
So +1 from me.
--
Thom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2012-10-15 21:32:07 | Re: [WIP] pg_ping utility |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2012-10-15 21:13:10 | Re: parallel pg_dump |