Phil Sorber <phil@omniti.com> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> 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
>> bigger. (In fact that might be the best place for this.)
> I considered src/bin/scripts but all those are for maintenance tasks
> on the DB. createdb/vacuumdb/reindexdb etc. It doesn't need any of the
> bits in common.h/common.c, nor does it need some of the includes that
> the build process has.
Well, we classify all those programs as client-side tools in the
documentation, so I don't see that pg_ping doesn't belong there.
The alternative is to give it its very own subdirectory under src/bin/;
which increases the infrastructure burden *significantly* (eg, now it
needs its own NLS message catalog) for not a lot of value IMO.
> 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 regardless of
where you put it in the source tree. Also, PQping itself is exercised
in every buildfarm run as part of "pg_ctl start", so I don't feel a real
strong need to test pg_ping separately.
regards, tom lane
