Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
>
>> Hmm. As stated, I would expect pg_ctl to make it worse.
>>
>
> I've been playing with this, and I think the problem was that we
> wanted a non-zero exit from the script if the start failed. That's
> trivial with pg_ctl -w but not running postgres directly. I guess I
> could run pg_ctl status in a loop after the start.
>
> The reason is that we don't want certain other processes attempting to
> start until and unless the database they use has started successfully.
>
Have you looked at what the Fedora script does?
Here's a snippet from my F11 system:
$SU -l postgres -c "$PGENGINE/postmaster -p '$PGPORT' -D
'$PGDATA' ${PGOPTS} &" >> "$PGLOG" 2>&1 < /dev/null sleep 2 pid=`pidof -s "$PGENGINE/postmaster"` if
[$pid ] && [ -f "$PGDATA/postmaster.pid" ] then success "$PSQL_START" touch
/var/lock/subsys/${NAME} head -n 1 "$PGDATA/postmaster.pid" >
"/var/run/postmaster.${PGPORT}.pid" echo else failure "$PSQL_START"
echo script_result=1 fi
Doesn't seem that much harder than using pg_ctl.
cheers
andrew
