Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant? - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwafVPYC0vvb9WAfA4zspgzS+FX+Kp9TJfdHFO=VfuURxg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?  (Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-admin


On Mon, Nov 24, 2025, 11:32 Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com> wrote:


"Option exists, is mentioned in --help, but doesn't do anything" is a (very low priority) bug.  That's plain and simple. 

It does exactly what it says it does.  A bug would be operating against the defined intention which this is not.  Your disagreement with its design might make it a bug for you personally but not for the project.

Now, if --help doesn't include the notes section maybe we could make it more clear in each of these optional arguments how they behave directly.  Given you aren't the first to express confusion here - just search the mailing lists - such a doc tweak would  have a decent chance of going in.


You'd say the same thing about a non-Postgresql program that you use, but you resist it in the system you're invested in.

Are you just trolling us now?  It's been made clear what this option does and you are seeming to just ignore that reality.

David J.

pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: Ron Johnson
Date:
Subject: Re: Is the pg_isready database name relevant?
Next
From: Shuai Tian
Date:
Subject: Publish packages to PGDG