On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Phil Sorber <p...@omniti.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Paquier >> <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > 3) Having an output close to what ping actually does would also be nice, >> > the >> > current output like Accepting/Rejecting Connections are not that >> >> Could you be more specific? Are you saying you don't want to see >> accepting/rejecting info output? > > OK sorry. > > I meant something like that for an accessible server: > $ pg_ping -c 3 -h server.com > PING server.com (192.168.1.3) > accept from 192.168.1.3: icmp_seq=0 time=0.241 ms > accept from 192.168.1.3: icmp_seq=0 time=0.240 ms > accept from 192.168.1.3: icmp_seq=0 time=0.242 ms > > Like that for a rejected connection: > reject from 192.168.1.3: icmp_seq=0 time=0.241 ms > > Like that for a timeout: > timeout from 192.168.1.3: icmp_seq=0 > Then print 1 line for each ping taken to stdout.
How does icmp_seq fit into this? Or was that an oversight? Also, in standard ping if you don't pass -c it will continue to loop until interrupted. Would you suggest that pg_ping mimic that, or that we add an additional flag for that behavior? FWIW, I would use 'watch' with the existing output for cases that I would need something like that. > -- > Michael Paquier > http://michael.otacoo.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
