Re: Linux start script updates - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Linux start script updates
Date
Msg-id 201003032307.o23N7ON14879@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Linux start script updates  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Linux start script updates
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> > Exactly.  With Fedora respecting the standard in this regard, I'm
> > convinced we should, too.  In reviewing things based on Peter's
> > question, I did start to have doubts about *not* special-casing
> > "status" -- it has its own set of values and 5 is not assigned, so
> > using it seems wrong.  It seems like it should be 3 ("program is not
> > running").  Agreed?
> 
> Probably.  I think that in practice most scripts are not very tense
> about this --- as long as the exit code is 0 or not-0 per spec, which
> not-0 value is reported is not so exciting to most people.

So, do the startup scripts as they exist in CVS need any adjustment?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 PG East:  http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] to_timestamp() and quartersf
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Custom GUCs still a bit broken