Horton

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

Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Phil Sorber <phil@omniti.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: 2013-01-29T16:43:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> 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.

Agreed.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao