Re: Occupied port warning

I wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > see
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-03/msg00679.php
>
> Well, with once release of field experience behind me I'd like to
> revisit this idea.  Who would actually be hurt by generating an error
> here like it used to do?

It seems that the only concern was broken resolvers (namely, "localhost" 
not being resolvable).  Then you can easily replace that with 
127.0.0.1, or * if you like.  That sounds like the place for an error 
message with a hint, not silent failure.  Comments?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/