On 01/21/2013 11:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>> Ok. I can add something to the notes section of the docs. I can also
>> add some code comments for this and for grabbing the default params.
> Sounds good.
>
>>> Oh, I see. Is it really important t
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> Ok. I can add something to the notes section of the docs. I can also
> add some code comments for this and for grabbing the default params.
Sounds good.
>> Oh, I see. Is it really important to have the host and port in the
>> output, or shou
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>> This was done to silence useless error messages in the logs. If you
>> attempt to connect as some user that does not exist, or to some
>> database that does not exist, it throws an error
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> This was done to silence useless error messages in the logs. If you
> attempt to connect as some user that does not exist, or to some
> database that does not exist, it throws an error in the logs, even
> with PQping. You could fix it with env
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>> Updated patch is rebased against current master and copyright year is
>> updated.
>
> I took a look at this. According to the documentation for
> PQpingParams: "It accepts connection par
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> Updated patch is rebased against current master and copyright year is updated.
I took a look at this. According to the documentation for
PQpingParams: "It accepts connection parameters identical to those of
PQconnectdbParams, described above.
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>>
>> Updated patch attached.
>
> Thanks. I am marking this patch as ready for committer.
>
> --
> Michael Paquier
> http://michael.otacoo.com
Updated patch is rebased against curre
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> Updated patch attached.
>
Thanks. I am marking this patch as ready for committer.
--
Michael Paquier
http://michael.otacoo.com
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>> On Sun, December 23, 2012 15:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>
>>> Once the 2 small things I noticed are fixed, this patch can be marked as
>>> ready for committer.
>>
>> I wasn't going to
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Erik Rijkers wrote:
> On Sun, December 23, 2012 15:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> Once the 2 small things I noticed are fixed, this patch can be marked as
>> ready for committer.
>
> I wasn't going to complain about it, but if we're going for small things
> anyw
On Sun, December 23, 2012 15:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> Once the 2 small things I noticed are fixed, this patch can be marked as
> ready for committer.
I wasn't going to complain about it, but if we're going for small things
anyway...
The output is now capitalised:
/tmp:6543 - Accepting Con
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 4:07 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>>
>>
>> Added new version with default verbose and quiet option. Also updated
>> docs to reflect changes.
>
> Thanks for the updated patches.
>
> Here is the status about the binary
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 4:07 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>
> Added new version with default verbose and quiet option. Also updated
> docs to reflect changes.
>
Thanks for the updated patches.
Here is the status about the binary patch:
- Code compiles without any warnings
- After testing the patch, it
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 08:59:00AM -0500, Phil Sorber wrote:
>> > On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Michael Paquier
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Bruce mentionned that pg_isready
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 08:59:00AM -0500, Phil Sorber wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Michael Paquier
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Bruce mentionned that pg_isready could be used directly by pg_ctl -w.
> > > Default as being non-verbos
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 08:59:00AM -0500, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> >>
> >> Something I was just thinking about while testing this again. I
> >> mentioned the issue before about someone m
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>>
>> Something I was just thinking about while testing this again. I
>> mentioned the issue before about someone meaning to put -v and putting
>> -V instead and it being a potential sourc
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Michael Paquier
> > OK. Let's do that and then mark this patch as ready for committer.
> > Thanks,
>
> Those changes have been made.
>
Cool. Thanks.
> Something I was just thinking about while testing this aga
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera
>> wrote:
>> > No, I think it is the reference docs on the returned value that must be
>> > fixed. That is, instead of saying tha
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > No, I think it is the reference docs on the returned value that must be
> > fixed. That is, instead of saying that the return value correspond to
> > the enum values, you should be
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Phil Sorber escribió:
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>
>> > - Same thing with this example:
>> > +
>> > +Standard Usage:
>> > +
>> > + $ pg_isready
>> > + $ echo $?
>> > + 0
>> > +
>>
Phil Sorber escribió:
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > - Same thing with this example:
> > +
> > +Standard Usage:
> > +
> > + $ pg_isready
> > + $ echo $?
> > + 0
> > +
> > +
> > For the time being PQPING_OK returns 0 because it is on t
On 2012/12/05, at 14:46, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Michael Paquier
>
> So I understand what you mean by the ordering might change, but this
> is actual output from the shell. I'm not sure how to convey that
> sentiment properly here and still have a real example. Perh
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:56 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>>
>> Here is the updated patch. I renamed it, but using v5 to stay consistent.
>
>
> After looking at this patch, I found the following problems:
> - There are a couple of whitespaces sti
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:56 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> Here is the updated patch. I renamed it, but using v5 to stay consistent.
>
After looking at this patch, I found the following problems:
- There are a couple of whitespaces still in the code, particularly at the
end of those lines
+ cons
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>>> > Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether
>>
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
> wrote:
>>
>> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> > Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether
>> > the server has finished starting up. If someone came with a
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether
> > the server has finished starting up. If someone came with a plausible
>
> Rename the utility to pg_isready?
>
+1, the current versi
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether
> the server has finished starting up. If someone came with a plausible
Rename the utility to pg_isready?
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Suppo
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 13:14 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I would normally agree with this analysis, but pg_ctl -w certainly
> need this ping functionality, so it kind of makes sense that others
> might need it too.
Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether
the serv
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:26:27AM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 11/23/12 9:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > We waited a couple of days for feedback for this feature. So based on
> > all the comments provided by everybody on this thread, perhaps we should
> > move on and implement the option
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 11/23/12 9:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > We waited a couple of days for feedback for this feature. So based on
> > all the comments provided by everybody on this thread, perhaps we should
> > move on and implement the options that
On 11/23/12 9:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> We waited a couple of days for feedback for this feature. So based on
> all the comments provided by everybody on this thread, perhaps we should
> move on and implement the options that would make pg_ping a better
> wrapper for PQPing. Comments?
Person
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> I am going to be unavailable until Wednesday, so maybe gives us a few
> more days for feedback.
>
Sure no problem. Thanks.
--
Michael Paquier
http://michael.otacoo.com
I am going to be unavailable until Wednesday, so maybe gives us a few
more days for feedback.
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 16,
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Paquier
> >> wrote:
> >> > 3) Having an output close to what ping actually doe
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Maybe I missed something here, but I believe it's standard that
> "program --help" should result in exit(0), no matter what the program's
> exitcode conventions are for live-fire exercises.
>
Yes indeed you are right. Thanks.
--
Michael Paquier
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Paquier
> >> wrote:
> >> > 3) Having an output close to what ping actually doe
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>> > 3) Having an output close to what ping actually does would also be nice,
>> > the
>> > current output like Accepting/
Attached is updated patch v4 with the changes Michael pointed out.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Phil Sorber writes:
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>> Hum, it is not really consistent to use a magic number here, particularly in
>>> the case
Phil Sorber writes:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> Hum, it is not really consistent to use a magic number here, particularly in
>> the case where an additional state would be added in the enum PGPing. So why
>> not simply return PQPING_NO_ATTEMPT when there are in
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> Hum, it is not really consistent to use a magic number here, particularly in
> the case where an additional state would be added in the enum PGPing. So why
> not simply return PQPING_NO_ATTEMPT when there are incorrect options or you
> sho
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> Thanks for the review.
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > Hi Phil,
> >
> > I am currently looking at your patch.
> > A lot of people already had a look at at, but I hope I will be helpful in
> > finalizing it a
Thanks for the review.
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> I am currently looking at your patch.
> A lot of people already had a look at at, but I hope I will be helpful in
> finalizing it and hand it over to a committer.
>
> Strangely I got the following error
Hi Phil,
I am currently looking at your patch.
A lot of people already had a look at at, but I hope I will be helpful in
finalizing it and hand it over to a committer.
Strangely I got the following error when using git apply:
$ git apply ~/download/pg_ping_v3.patch
error: src/bin/scripts/.gitigno
Thom Brown wrote:
> On 24 October 2012 15:24, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Guys,
> >
> > May I remind everyone that we still have an commitfest open, which to
> > date has 23 patches needing some effort, and that this patch, while
> > probably very useful and interesting, belongs to the next commitfe
On 24 October 2012 15:24, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Guys,
>
> May I remind everyone that we still have an commitfest open, which to
> date has 23 patches needing some effort, and that this patch, while
> probably very useful and interesting, belongs to the next commitfest
> which is not yet in progr
Guys,
May I remind everyone that we still have an commitfest open, which to
date has 23 patches needing some effort, and that this patch, while
probably very useful and interesting, belongs to the next commitfest
which is not yet in progress.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadra
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 10/22/12 11:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
>> Also, it seems that about 75% of the patch is connection options processing.
>> How about
>> we get rid of all that and just have
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Quick review ...
>
> Code:
>
> *** install: all installdirs
> *** 54,59
> --- 55,61
> $(INSTALL_PROGRAM) clusterdb$(X) '$(DESTDIR)$(bindir)'/clusterdb$(X)
> $(INSTALL_PROGRAM) vacuumdb$(X) '$(DESTDI
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 10/22/12 11:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> Also, it seems that about 75% of the patch is connection options processing.
> How about
> we get rid of all that and just have them specify a connection string? It
> would be a break
> with t
On 10/22/12 11:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Phil Sorber writes:
>>> Here is the new patch. I renamed the utility from pg_ping to pingdb to
>>> go along with the naming convention of src/bin/scripts.
>>
>> Uh, no, that's not a step forward. Leavi
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Phil Sorber writes:
>> Here is the new patch. I renamed the utility from pg_ping to pingdb to
>> go along with the naming convention of src/bin/scripts.
>
> Uh, no, that's not a step forward. Leaving out a "pg" prefix from those
> script names i
Phil Sorber writes:
> Here is the new patch. I renamed the utility from pg_ping to pingdb to
> go along with the naming convention of src/bin/scripts.
Uh, no, that's not a step forward. Leaving out a "pg" prefix from those
script names is universally agreed to have been a mistake. We've not
fel
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Phil Sorber writes:
>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Yeah, I know a whole new executable is kind of a pain, and the amount of
>>> infrastructure and added maintenance seems a bit high compared to what
>>> this does. But a
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Phil Sorber writes:
>> I would also like it to have a regression test
>> which none of those seem to have.
>
> [ shrug... ] There is nothing in the current regression infrastructure
> that would work for this, so that desire is pie-in-the-sky re
Phil Sorber writes:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, I know a whole new executable is kind of a pain, and the amount of
>> infrastructure and added maintenance seems a bit high compared to what
>> this does. But a lot of the programs in src/bin/scripts are not much
>>
"David Johnston" writes:
>> Yeah, I know a whole new executable is kind of a pain, and the amount of
>> infrastructure and added maintenance seems a bit high compared to what
>> this does. But a lot of the programs in src/bin/scripts are not much
>> bigger. (In fact that might be the best place f
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
>> Why not add a pg_ctl subcommand for that? For me that sounds like a good
>> place
>> for it...
>
> I think that's a bad fit, because every other pg_ctl subcommand requires
> access to the data directory. It would be ver
> -Original Message-
> From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-
> ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7:13 PM
> To: Andres Freund
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thom Brown; Phil Sorber
> Subjec
Andres Freund writes:
> Why not add a pg_ctl subcommand for that? For me that sounds like a good
> place
> for it...
I think that's a bad fit, because every other pg_ctl subcommand requires
access to the data directory. It would be very confusing if this one
subcommand worked remotely when the
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Monday, October 15, 2012 11:28:36 PM Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 13 October 2012 22:19, Phil Sorber wrote:
>> > Based on a previous thread
>> > (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-10/msg00131.php) I
>> > have put together a fir
On Monday, October 15, 2012 11:28:36 PM Thom Brown wrote:
> On 13 October 2012 22:19, Phil Sorber 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 patch
On 13 October 2012 22:19, Phil Sorber 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 li
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
wante
65 matches
Mail list logo
