On 2015-03-03 11:43:46 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> It's certainly better than now, but why put DBAs through an extra step for
> no reason?
Because it makes it more complicated than it already is? It's nontrivial
to capture the output, escape it to somehow fit into a delimited field,
et al. I'd rather have a committed improvement, than talks about a
bigger one.
> Though, in the case of multiple errors perhaps it would be best
> to just report a count and point them at the log.
It'll be confusing to have different interfaces in one/multiple error cases.
> >Generally we obviously need some status to indicate that the config file
> >has been reloaded, but that could be easily combined with storing the
> >error message.
>
> Not sure I'm following... are you saying we should include the error message
> in postmaster.pid?
I'm saying that you'll need a way to notice that a reload was processed
or not. And that can't really be the message itself, there has to be
some other field; like the timestamp Tom proposes.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services
