I'm not sure. I can see pros and cons both ways. But the fundamental need is to verify that a given server will happily parse and be able to use a new my.cnf. I could even imagine starting drizzled up with an argument that says "hey, don't actually try to do anything useful beyond parsing this config".
Local (logged in on the box) testing is probably sufficient for our needs but others might argue for remote. Jeremy On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Brian Aker <br...@tangent.org> wrote: > Hi! > > On Apr 28, 2009, at 11:13 AM, Jeremy Zawodny wrote: > > The other related thing that I've occasionally wished for, aside from >> "remote restart", is the equivalent of apache's "apachectl configtest" to >> verify that my new config parses before trying to bounce a server. It's a >> little thing, but you use it a lot in Apache land... >> > > In the protocol, or as a "SQL" level command? > > Cheers, > -Brian >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : drizzle-discuss@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
