Re: pg_ctl idempotent option - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Date
Msg-id 20130130213511.GA12299@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_ctl idempotent option  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 04:07:45PM +1100, Josh Berkus wrote:
> 
> >>> I don't think I like --force because it isn't clear if we are forcing
> >>> the start to have done something, or forcing the server to be running.
> > 
> > Do we need this idempotent feature for "stop" too?
> 
> Yes, of course.

If idempotent only affects -w (we don't wait for the return code without
-w), can we make -W to be idempotent?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: plpgsql versus SPI plan abstraction
Next
From: Jan Urbański
Date:
Subject: Re: plpgsql versus SPI plan abstraction