On 19.04.23 06:21, Stephen Frost wrote:
I don't think involving pg_ctl is necessary or desirable, since it would
make any future changes like that even more complicated.
I'm a bit confused by this- if pg_ctl is invoked then we have
more-or-less full control over parsing and reporting out the answer, so
while it might be a bit more complicated for us, it seems surely simpler
for the end user. Or maybe you're referring to something here that I'm
not thinking of?
Getting pg_ctl involved just requires a lot more work. We need to write
actual code, documentation, tests, help output, translations, etc. If
we ever change anything, then we need to transition the command-line
arguments somehow, add more documentation, etc.
A file is a much simpler interface: You just write to it, write two
sentences of documentation, that's all.
Or to put it another way, if we don't think a file is an appropriate
interface, then why is a PID file appropriate?
Independent of the above though ... this hand-wringing about what we
might do in the relative near-term when we haven't done much in the past
many-many years regarding listen_addresses or port strikes me as
unlikely to be necessary. Let's pick something and get it done and
accept that we may have to change it at some point in the future, but
that's kinda what major releases are for, imv anyway.
Right. I'm perfectly content with just allowing port number 0 and
leaving it at that.
