On 13.04.23 04:45, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
But getting your agreement is important to get this in; I am willing to
play along and resolve both (1) and (2) in one go. As for the
implementation approach for (2), which of the following options would
you prefer?
a) Document postmaster.pid as it stands today
b) Expose the port number through pg_ctl (*my personal favorite)
c) Redesign its content below line 1 to make it extensible (make unnamed
lines named, for example)
If none of the above options suit you, do you have a strategy you'd prefer?
You could just drop another file into the data directory that just
contains the port number ($PGDATA/port). However, if we ever do
multiple ports, that would still require a change in the format of that
file, so I don't know if that's actually better than a).
I don't think involving pg_ctl is necessary or desirable, since it would
make any future changes like that even more complicated.
