Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2013-01-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Updated patch is rebased against current master and copyright year is updated. I took a look at this. According to the documentation for PQpingParams: It accepts connection parameters identical to those of PQconnectdbParams,

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2013-01-20 Thread Phil Sorber
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Updated patch is rebased against current master and copyright year is updated. I took a look at this. According to the documentation for

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2013-01-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: This was done to silence useless error messages in the logs. If you attempt to connect as some user that does not exist, or to some database that does not exist, it throws an error in the logs, even with PQping. You could fix

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2013-01-20 Thread Phil Sorber
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: This was done to silence useless error messages in the logs. If you attempt to connect as some user that does not exist, or to some database that does

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2013-01-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Ok. I can add something to the notes section of the docs. I can also add some code comments for this and for grabbing the default params. Sounds good. Oh, I see. Is it really important to have the host and port in the

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2013-01-20 Thread Craig Ringer
On 01/21/2013 11:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Ok. I can add something to the notes section of the docs. I can also add some code comments for this and for grabbing the default params. Sounds good. Oh, I see. Is it really

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2013-01-18 Thread Phil Sorber
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Updated patch attached. Thanks. I am marking this patch as ready for committer. -- Michael Paquier http://michael.otacoo.com Updated

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-24 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Updated patch attached. Thanks. I am marking this patch as ready for committer. -- Michael Paquier http://michael.otacoo.com

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-23 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 4:07 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Added new version with default verbose and quiet option. Also updated docs to reflect changes. Thanks for the updated patches. Here is the status about the binary patch: - Code compiles without any warnings - After testing

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-23 Thread Phil Sorber
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 4:07 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Added new version with default verbose and quiet option. Also updated docs to reflect changes. Thanks for the updated patches. Here is

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-23 Thread Erik Rijkers
On Sun, December 23, 2012 15:29, Michael Paquier wrote: Once the 2 small things I noticed are fixed, this patch can be marked as ready for committer. I wasn't going to complain about it, but if we're going for small things anyway... The output is now capitalised: /tmp:6543 - Accepting

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-23 Thread Phil Sorber
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Erik Rijkers e...@xs4all.nl wrote: On Sun, December 23, 2012 15:29, Michael Paquier wrote: Once the 2 small things I noticed are fixed, this patch can be marked as ready for committer. I wasn't going to complain about it, but if we're going for small things

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-23 Thread Phil Sorber
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Erik Rijkers e...@xs4all.nl wrote: On Sun, December 23, 2012 15:29, Michael Paquier wrote: Once the 2 small things I noticed are fixed, this patch can be marked as ready for committer. I

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-21 Thread Phil Sorber
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 08:59:00AM -0500, Phil Sorber wrote: On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-19 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 08:59:00AM -0500, Phil Sorber wrote: On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Bruce mentionned that pg_isready could be used directly by pg_ctl -w.

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-11 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 08:59:00AM -0500, Phil Sorber wrote: On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Something I was just thinking about while testing this again. I mentioned the

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-08 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Michael Paquier OK. Let's do that and then mark this patch as ready for committer. Thanks, Those changes have been made. Cool. Thanks. Something I was just thinking about while testing

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-08 Thread Phil Sorber
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Something I was just thinking about while testing this again. I mentioned the issue before about someone meaning to put -v and putting -V

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-06 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: No, I think it is the reference docs on the returned value that must be fixed. That is, instead of saying that the return value correspond to

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-06 Thread Phil Sorber
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: No, I think it is the reference docs on the returned value

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Phil Sorber escribió: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: - Same thing with this example: + para +Standard Usage: +screen + prompt$/prompt userinputpg_isready/userinput + prompt$/prompt userinputecho $?/userinput +

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-05 Thread Phil Sorber
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Phil Sorber escribió: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: - Same thing with this example: + para +Standard Usage: +screen + prompt$/prompt

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-04 Thread Phil Sorber
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:56 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Here is the updated patch. I renamed it, but using v5 to stay consistent. After looking at this patch, I found the following problems: - There

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-04 Thread Michael Paquier
On 2012/12/05, at 14:46, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Michael Paquier So I understand what you mean by the ordering might change, but this is actual output from the shell. I'm not sure how to convey that sentiment properly here and still have a real

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-03 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:56 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Here is the updated patch. I renamed it, but using v5 to stay consistent. After looking at this patch, I found the following problems: - There are a couple of whitespaces still in the code, particularly at the end of those

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-12-01 Thread Phil Sorber
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Dimitri Fontaine dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: Sure, PQping is

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-27 Thread Dimitri Fontaine
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether the server has finished starting up. If someone came with a plausible Rename the utility to pg_isready? -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise,

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-27 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Dimitri Fontaine dimi...@2ndquadrant.frwrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether the server has finished starting up. If someone came with a plausible Rename the utility to

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-27 Thread Phil Sorber
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Dimitri Fontaine dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether the server

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
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?

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-26 Thread Michael Paquier
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

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:26:27AM -0500, Peter Eisentraut 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

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 13:14 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: I would normally agree with this analysis, but pg_ctl -w certainly need this ping functionality, so it kind of makes sense that others might need it too. Sure, PQping is useful for this very specific use case of seeing whether the server

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-25 Thread Phil Sorber
I am going to be unavailable until Wednesday, so maybe gives us a few more days for feedback. On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-25 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: I am going to be unavailable until Wednesday, so maybe gives us a few more days for feedback. Sure no problem. Thanks. -- Michael Paquier http://michael.otacoo.com

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-23 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: 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

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-18 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: 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

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-18 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Maybe I missed something here, but I believe it's standard that program --help should result in exit(0), no matter what the program's exitcode conventions are for live-fire exercises. Yes indeed you are right. Thanks. --

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-16 Thread Phil Sorber
Attached is updated patch v4 with the changes Michael pointed out. On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Hum, it is not really consistent to

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-16 Thread Phil Sorber
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

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-15 Thread Michael Paquier
Hi Phil, I am currently looking at your patch. A lot of people already had a look at at, but I hope I will be helpful in finalizing it and hand it over to a committer. Strangely I got the following error when using git apply: $ git apply ~/download/pg_ping_v3.patch error:

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-15 Thread Phil Sorber
Thanks for the review. On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Phil, I am currently looking at your patch. A lot of people already had a look at at, but I hope I will be helpful in finalizing it and hand it over to a committer. Strangely I got

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-15 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote: Thanks for the review. On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Phil, I am currently looking at your patch. A lot of people already had a look at at, but I hope I will be

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-11-15 Thread Phil Sorber
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Hum, it is not really consistent to use a magic number here, particularly in the case where an additional state would be added in the enum PGPing. So why not simply return PQPING_NO_ATTEMPT when there are

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-24 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Guys, May I remind everyone that we still have an commitfest open, which to date has 23 patches needing some effort, and that this patch, while probably very useful and interesting, belongs to the next commitfest which is not yet in progress. -- Álvaro Herrera

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-24 Thread Thom Brown
On 24 October 2012 15:24, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Guys, May I remind everyone that we still have an commitfest open, which to date has 23 patches needing some effort, and that this patch, while probably very useful and interesting, belongs to the next commitfest which

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-24 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Thom Brown wrote: On 24 October 2012 15:24, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Guys, May I remind everyone that we still have an commitfest open, which to date has 23 patches needing some effort, and that this patch, while probably very useful and interesting, belongs to the

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-23 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 10/22/12 11:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote: On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes: Here is the new patch. I renamed the utility from pg_ping to pingdb to go along with the naming convention of src/bin/scripts. Uh, no, that's not a

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-23 Thread Christopher Browne
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On 10/22/12 11:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote: Also, it seems that about 75% of the patch is connection options processing. How about we get rid of all that and just have them specify a connection string? It would be a

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-23 Thread Phil Sorber
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: Quick review ... Code: *** install: all installdirs *** 54,59 --- 55,61 $(INSTALL_PROGRAM) clusterdb$(X) '$(DESTDIR)$(bindir)'/clusterdb$(X) $(INSTALL_PROGRAM) vacuumdb$(X)

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-23 Thread Phil Sorber
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Christopher Browne cbbro...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On 10/22/12 11:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote: Also, it seems that about 75% of the patch is connection options processing. How about we get rid

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-22 Thread Phil Sorber
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes: Here is the new patch. I renamed the utility from pg_ping to pingdb to go along with the naming convention of src/bin/scripts. Uh, no, that's not a step forward. Leaving out a pg prefix

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-21 Thread Phil Sorber
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Yeah, I know a whole new executable is kind of a pain, and the amount of infrastructure and added maintenance seems a bit

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-21 Thread Tom Lane
Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes: Here is the new patch. I renamed the utility from pg_ping to pingdb to go along with the naming convention of src/bin/scripts. Uh, no, that's not a step forward. Leaving out a pg prefix from those script names is universally agreed to have been a mistake.

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread Thom Brown
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

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread Andres Freund
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

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread Phil Sorber
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: 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

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes: Why not add a pg_ctl subcommand for that? For me that sounds like a good place for it... I think that's a bad fit, because every other pg_ctl subcommand requires access to the data directory. It would be very confusing if this one subcommand

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread David Johnston
-Original Message- From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers- ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7:13 PM To: Andres Freund Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thom Brown; Phil Sorber Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread Phil Sorber
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes: Why not add a pg_ctl subcommand for that? For me that sounds like a good place for it... I think that's a bad fit, because every other pg_ctl subcommand requires access to the

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
David Johnston pol...@yahoo.com writes: Yeah, I know a whole new executable is kind of a pain, and the amount of infrastructure and added maintenance seems a bit high compared to what this does. But a lot of the programs in src/bin/scripts are not much bigger. (In fact that might be the best

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Yeah, I know a whole new executable is kind of a pain, and the amount of infrastructure and added maintenance seems a bit high compared to what this does. But a lot of the programs in

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] pg_ping utility

2012-10-15 Thread Phil Sorber
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes: I would also like it to have a regression test which none of those seem to have. [ shrug... ] There is nothing in the current regression infrastructure that would work for this, so that