Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability - Mailing list pgsql-www

From Marc G. Fournier
Subject Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability
Date
Msg-id 20040929202326.Q3407@ganymede.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Server unreliability  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl>)
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability  (Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au>)
List pgsql-www
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> about pg_query not getting a good connection or similar problems.
> Isn't normal advice to check return codes before even trying to use the
> connections?  Why isn't this done in the main postgresql.org code, where
> anyone can see it, is beyond me.  Of course the solution to the
> underlying problem is to restart the Postgres server, but why should we
> inform the user that Postgres' own database server is down, in the worst
> possible way?

Just curious here, but when/where?  We haven't had a database issue in
quite awhile that *I'm* aware of ... in fact, the whole web site is
static, generated periodically from .php files, so that the mirrors can
pick things up properly, so there should never be a 'cannot connect to
database' issue, since there are no connections to the database being made
...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

pgsql-www by date:

Previous
From: Justin Clift
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability