Re: Slightly better testing for pg_ctl(1)'s -w... - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Slightly better testing for pg_ctl(1)'s -w...
Date
Msg-id 10854.1097424047@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Slightly better testing for pg_ctl(1)'s -w...  (Sean Chittenden <chitt@speakeasy.net>)
Responses Re: Slightly better testing for pg_ctl(1)'s -w...  (Sean Chittenden <chitt@speakeasy.net>)
List pgsql-patches
Sean Chittenden <chitt@speakeasy.net> writes:
> pg_ctl(1)'s -w option works well if the default user can automatically
> authenticate without any user intervention.  The attached patch checks
> the error message to see if it's asking for a password.  The theory
> being that if it's asking for a password, the backend is up.  I'm not
> entirely happy with the fact that I'm dependent on the error message
> text, but I couldn't easily figure out a better way to test this via
> libpq(3), so I'm not too unhappy... it's just not elegant.

psql and pg_dump test for this same error string, so you're in good
company on that front, but password prompting is not the only or even
the most likely misleading failure.  I believe both the Red Hat and
Debian distributions set the default auth method to IDENT, meaning that
the message you'd likely get is going to be a bleat about IDENT auth
failing, not a password request.  Unfortunately that message is going to
be localized, but it should have a SQLSTATE assigned, so you could
check for ERRCODE_INVALID_AUTHORIZATION_SPECIFICATION ...

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Casting INT4 to BOOL...
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Casting INT4 to BOOL...