Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2015-03-22 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Mar 20, 2015, at 4:11 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > No one replied. Want a new patch with that? Here it is. Best, David launchd2.patch Description: Binary data smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2015-03-20 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Mar 20, 2015, at 4:21 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > > On 3/20/15 6:11 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: >> ProgramArguments >> >> /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres >> -D >> /usr/local/pgsql/data >> > > Hrm, would /var/db/postgres be better? I'm not sure

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2015-03-20 Thread Jim Nasby
On 3/20/15 6:11 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: ProgramArguments /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres -D /usr/local/pgsql/data Hrm, would /var/db/postgres be better? I'm not sure if the stuff Apple does with /private/ would cause p

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2015-03-20 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Mar 19, 2015, at 8:12 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Where are we on this? I suggested this plist: Disabled Label org.postgresql.postgresql UserName postgres GroupName postgres ProgramArguments /us

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2015-03-19 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 03:59:01PM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote: > Hackers, > > In Mac OS X 10.10 “Yosemite,” Apple removed SystemStarter, upon > which our OS X start script has relied since 2007. So here is a patch > that adds support for its replacement, launchd. It includes 7 day log > rotation

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-11-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 10/20/14 8:53 PM, Wim Lewis wrote: > Apple has published their changes to Postgres (since they ship it in recent > versions of OSX) here, fwiw, including the launchd plist they use: > http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/PostgreSQL/ > > One thing I noticed is that Apple also used the label

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-21 Thread Florian Pflug
On Oct21, 2014, at 02:53 , Wim Lewis wrote: > >> 2) AFAICS, this .plist file doesn't do anything about launchd's habit of >> not waiting for the network to come up. >> If true, the job will be kept alive as long as the network is up, where >> up is defined as at least one non-loopback interfac

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-21 Thread Marti Raudsepp
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Wim Lewis wrote: > I think the idea of OnDemand is for launchd items to act a bit like inetd > does: launchd creates the listening socket (or mach port or file-change > notification) on the port specified in the plist, and only starts the > process when someone tri

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-20 Thread Wim Lewis
On Oct 20, 2014, at 5:03 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > This another reason not to use KeepAlive, I guess. OnDemand is supposed to > fire up a job only when it’s needed. No idea what that means. I think the idea of OnDemand is for launchd items to act a bit like inetd does: launchd creates the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-20 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Oct 20, 2014, at 5:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > [ looks ... ] Yeah, there's no mention of KeepAlive in 10.4's > launchd.plist man page. It does have a convenient example > saying that OnDemand = false does what we want: Yeah, let’s see if we can cover both. > I'd just drop them into files in t

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-20 Thread Tom Lane
"David E. Wheeler" writes: > On Oct 20, 2014, at 4:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> (1) I'd vote for just removing the SystemStarter stuff: it complicates >> understanding what's happening, to no very good end. We can easily >> check that the launchd way works back to whatever we think our oldest >> su

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-20 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Oct 20, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > You're enabling POSTGRESQL in /etc/hostconfig before any of the files are > copied over... what happens if we puke before the files get copied? Would it > be better to enable after the scripts are in place? That code was there; I just indented it

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-20 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Oct 20, 2014, at 4:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > (1) I'd vote for just removing the SystemStarter stuff: it complicates > understanding what's happening, to no very good end. We can easily > check that the launchd way works back to whatever we think our oldest > supported OS X release is. (10.4.x

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-20 Thread Jim Nasby
On 10/20/14, 5:59 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: In Mac OS X 10.10 “Yosemite,” Apple removed SystemStarter, upon which our OS X start script has relied since 2007. So here is a patch that adds support for its replacement, launchd. It includes 7 day log rotation like the old script did. The instal

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-20 Thread Tom Lane
"David E. Wheeler" writes: > In Mac OS X 10.10 “Yosemite,” Apple removed SystemStarter, upon which our > OS X start script has relied since 2007. So here is a patch that adds support > for its replacement, launchd. It includes 7 day log rotation like the old > script did. The install script

[HACKERS] Patch: Add launchd Support

2014-10-20 Thread David E. Wheeler
Hackers, In Mac OS X 10.10 “Yosemite,” Apple removed SystemStarter, upon which our OS X start script has relied since 2007. So here is a patch that adds support for its replacement, launchd. It includes 7 day log rotation like the old script did. The install script still prefers the SystemStart