On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 11/23/12 9:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > > We waited a couple of days for feedback for this feature. So based on > > all the comments provided by everybody on this thread, perhaps we should > > move on and implement the options that would make pg_ping a better > > wrapper for PQPing. Comments? > > Personally, I still don't see the general utility of this. For > monitoring, psql -c 'select 1' is much more useful. For network > analysis, you can use network analysis tools. The niche for pg_ping in > between those is so narrow that I cannot see it. > As a wrapper for PQPing, you can get different server status specific to libpq which are PQPING_OK, PQPING_REJECT and PQPING_NO_RESPONSE, and perhaps more in the future if PQPing is extended in a way or another. So the purpose of this feature is to allow users to put there hands on a core feature that would allow them to get a libpq-specific server status, and to check the accessibility to the server with something lighter than a psql client connection. Any additional comments Phil? -- Michael Paquier http://michael.otacoo.com
