Horton

Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility)

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Phil Sorber <phil@omniti.com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-01-28T18:12:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Phil Sorber escribió:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maybe. But I'm not inclined to add new libpq interface at this stage.
> > Because we are in the last CommitFest and I'm not sure whether
> > we have enough time to implement that. Instead, how about using
> > both PQconninfoParse() and PQconndefaults() like uri-regress.c does?
> > Or just remove that output message? At least I don't think that the
> > information about host and port needs to be output. Which would make
> > the code very simpler.
> 
> I think that output is important as do others up thread. I think it'd
> be simpler to just disable dbname's ability to double as conninfo. If
> we are looking for easy, that is.
> 
> I don't mind duplicating the behavior from conninfo_array_parse() or
> uri-regress.c either. I can just put a comment that at some point in
> the future we should add a libpq interface for it.

I suggest duplicate the code for 9.3, and submit a patch to refactor
into a new libpq function for CF2013-next.  If the patch is simple
enough, we can consider putting it into 9.3.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services