On Monday, October 15, 2012 11:28:36 PM Thom Brown wrote: > On 13 October 2012 22:19, Phil Sorber <p...@omniti.com> wrote: > > Based on a previous thread > > (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-10/msg00131.php) I > > have put together a first attempt of a pg_ping utility. I am attaching > > two patches. One for the executable and one for the docs. > > > > I would also like to make a regression tests and translations, but > > wanted to get feedback on what I had so far. > > pg_pong: > > 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 2 days > > Well this works for me, and I raised a couple typos directly to Phil. > The advantage of this over "pg_ctl status" is that it doesn't have to > be run on the machine local to the database, and access to the data > directory isn't required if it is run locally. The advantage over > connecting using a regular connection is that authentication and > authorisation isn't necessary, and if all connections are in use, it > will still return the desired result. And it does what it says on the > tin. > > So +1 from me.
Why not add a pg_ctl subcommand for that? For me that sounds like a good place for it... Andres -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
